I find little or nothing to
object to
in this exposition, from pp. 161-163 inclusively, of
Phil
. ii. 8, 9. And yet I seem to feel, as if a something that should have been prefixed, and to which all these considerations would have been excellent seconds, were missing. To explain the Cross by the necessity of sacrificial blood, and the sacrificial blood as a type and
ante
-delegate or pre-substitute of the Cross, is too like an
argumentum in circulo
.