from the common or general principle which constituted its essence or vitality.

What, then, is the true definition of Faith, as the term is here employed by the Apostle? what, in other words, is that definition of Faith, which, with equal propriety, will suit the various described cases of ALL those confessedly faithful persons whom he enumerates?

The inspired writer himself has provided us with such a definition: and, as if to prevent the possibility of error in regard to his intended. meaning, he has most luminously and most methodically prefixed it to his series of personal illustrations.

Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen *.

Now, certainly, the things hoped for, and the things unseen, which are specified in this definition, cannot mean things which are the subject of mere human unauthorised conjecture and speculation they must, on the contrary, denote things which are the express subject of an authoritative divine revelation. For, as St. Paul elsewhere distinctly teaches us, Faith cometh by HEARING, and hearing by THE WORD OF GOD †. The very idea, therefore, of Faith, according both to rea*Heb. xi. 1.

† Rom. x. 17.

son and to Scripture, involves, of plain necessity, the idea of A Divine Revelation.

Such being the case, the Apostle's definition may otherwise be rightly expressed in manner following.

Faith is an assured belief in divine revelation, whatever be the specific object or nature of any

may

divine communication in particular.

That this definition, in varied phraseology, accurately sets forth the true meaning of the Apostle's definition, no one, I presume, will venture to deny. Accordingly, the present definition, or rather (to speak more properly) the Apostle's own definition, will be found accurately to suit EVERY case which he has adduced in illustration of the principle. The faith of Enoch, of Noah, of Abraham, of Joseph, of Moses, of Rahab, of Gideon, of Barak, of Samson, of Jephthah, of David, of Samuel, might severally vary, as it did vary, in regard to its specific object: but, in principle, their faith was UNIFORMLY a faith in divine revelation; that is to say, in the words of the Apostle, their faith was UNIFORMLY the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen *.

* It may be objected, that the faith of Daniel by which he stopped the mouths of lions, and the faith of Hananiah and

II. We have now obtained the only true dèfinition of that Faith, which the sacred writer so largely celebrates and illustrates: let us next apply it to the particular faith of Abel, who occupies a conspicuous place in the apostolic catalogue of recorded worthies.

By faith, Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous; God testifying of his gifts: and, by it, he being dead yet speaketh *.

The word Faith, we have established, as employed by the Apostle throughout his entire eulogy, invariably denotes faith in a divine reve

Mishael and Azariah by which they quenched the violence of fire (Heb. xi. 33, 34.), cannot be said to have been Faith in a divine revelation: because it was not previously revealed to Daniel, that he should be saved from the lions; neither was it previously revealed to the three children, that they should be preserved from the furnace.

This, no doubt, is true: but then I take such a view of their faith to be altogether erroneous. The faith of Daniel consisted in his manfully performing his religious duties to his God, according to the revealed Law of his fathers, in despite of the mad atheistical decree of Darius: and the faith of the three children consisted in their daring the furnace, rather than violate the revealed prohibition of idolatry. Thus, in each case, their faith was Faith in a divine revelation: and, in truth, their faith was so much the greater, because they knew not anteriorly, whether in their bodies they should be severally delivered from the lions and the furnace.

* Heb. xi. 4.

lation. The faith, therefore, of Abel was faith in a divine revelation, whatever might be its specific object or nature.

Now we are assued, that, by faith, Abel offered up unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain. If, then, faith were the ground, on which Abel offered a more excellent sacrifice than Cain; it is clear, that, in regard to this more excellent sacrifice, Abel possessed a faith which Cain did not possess: for nothing, I think, can be more evident, than that, if Cain had possessed Abel's faith, he would have offered to God Abel's sacrifice. But the faith, here spoken of, is faith in a divine revelation. Abel, therefore, possessed a faith in a specific divine revelation, which Cain, by the very terms of the Apostle's statement, did not possess. Now the faith in a divine revelation, possessed by Abel, led him to offer a sacrifice from the firstlings of his flock for, says the Apostle, BY FAITH Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain. Consequently, the want of faith in a divine revelation, on the part of Cain, led him to offer a vegetable sacrifice, which the Apostle describes as a less excellent sacrifice than that of Abel. Hence I deem it manifest, that the faith of the one brother, and the unbelief of the

other brother, respected the specific action of devoting that animal sacrifice, which Abel actually did devote, and which Cain (in consequence of his unbelieving omission) was afterward commanded by God himself to devote. But the faith of Abel, as to its principle, was faith in a divine revelation: while, as to its special object, it was faith in the religious necessity of devoting an animal sin-offering. Therefore, finally, the religious necessity of devoting an animal sin-offering was the specific object of that divine revelation in which Abel is said to have believed. This conclusion, however, is equivalent to the propo sition, that Expiatory sacrifice was, from the first, instituted of God. Hence, through the medium of the Epistle to the Hebrews, I claim to have demonstrated the primeval divine institution of patriarchal expiatory sacrifice.

III. Like myself, Mr. Davison professes to have defined the true principle of the eleventh chapter to the Hebrews: and, from that definition, he would bring out a result, which, in the matter of Abel's sacrifice, should not contradict his own favourite system.

Unless I have wholly and unintentionally misunderstood him, he would define the Faith, described by the Apostle in various actual opera

L