Page images
[ocr errors]

it would in all cases, according to this doctrine, render proaches, rather than die; and so he may sin as often it morally fit and right that forgiveness should be exer- as he plcases, and yet have it always in his power to cised, and consequently wrong that it should be refused. turn aside the punishment, which amounts to a subIn no case, therefore, could the penalty of the law be in stantive repeal of the law and the abrogation of all goany degree enforced.

vernment. If, on the other hand, the production of a But if repentance be taken in the second sense, and penitent disposition is not in his own power, and can this is certainly the light in which true repentance is only come from above, as a matter of grace, it is a exhibited in the Scriptures, then it is forgotten that strange anomaly to suppose a government so established such is the corrupt state of man, that he is incapable as to oblige the governor to concur in producing repentof penitence of this kind. This follows from that view ance in those who despise his authority, so that they of human depravity which we have already established may avoid punishment. This would be grace, and not from the Scriptures, and which we need not repeat. law, most emphatically: for if the governor were bound In conformity with this view of the entire corruptness by any principle of any kind to produce this sentiment of man's nature, therefore, repentance is said to be the of repentance in order to constitute a moral fitness in gift of Christ, who, in consequence of being exalted the exercise of pardon, he would, for any thing we can to be a Prince and a Saviour, gives repentance," as see, be bound by it to use the same means to render all well as “remission of sins," a gift quite superfluous, if penitent, that all might escape punishment; and to do to repent truly were in the power of man, and inde- this, too, as often as they fell into sin, that punishment pendent of Christ. To suppose man to be capable of might, in no case, follow, except when the means emà repentance which is the result of genuine principle, ployed by him for that purpose were obstinately resisted; is to assume human nature to be what it is not. The and thus repentance would be brought in as the substiwhole rests on this question : for, if man be totally | tute of obedience. But since the end of law is to comcorrupt, the only principles from which that repentance mand obedience, and it is invested with authority for and correction of manners, which are supposed in the the purpose of effecting that, it ceases unswer the argument, can flow, do not exist in his nature; and if | purpose for which it was established, when it accepts we allow no more than that the propensity to evil in repentance in the place of obedience. This is not its him is stronger than the propensity to good, it would end, as an instrument of moral government; nor is it be absurd to suppose that in opposing propensities, the a means to its proper end, which is obedience; for reweaker should ever resist the more powerful.

pentance can give no security for future obedience, But take it that repentance, in the best interpreta- since a penitent transgressor, whose nature infected tion, is possible to fallen unassisted man, and that it with a corrupt moral principle and habit, is much more is actually exercised and followed even by a better con- liable to sin again than when innocent as in his first duct, still in no good sense can it be shown, that this estate; and, as this scheme makes no provision at all would make it morally right and fit in the Supreme for the moral cure of man's iallen nature by the renewBeing to forgive offences against his government. So-ing influences of the Holy Spirit, so it abolishes all law cinus, we have seen in the above quotation, allows that as an instrument of moral order, and substitutes pardon it would not be right, not consistent with God's moral as an End of government instead of obedience. attributes, to forgive the impenitent; and all, indeed, With this view of the insufficiency of repentance to who urge repentance as the sole condition of pardon, obtain pardon the Scriptures agree; for, noi now to adadopt the same principle; but how, then, does it ap- vert to the doctrine of the Old Testament, which will pear that to grant pardon upon repentance is right, that be subsequently considered, we need only refer to the is, just in itself, or a manifestation or a just and right- Gospel, which is professedly a declaration of the mercy Gous government?

of God to sinning men, and which also professedly If right be taken in the sense of moral fitness, its lays down the means by which the pardon of their of lowest sense, the moral correspondence of one thing fences is to be attained. Without entering at all into with another, it canno: be inorally fit in a perfectly other subjects connected with this, it is enough here to holy being to be so indifferent to offences, as not to ex- show that, in the Gospel, pardon is not connected with press towards the offenders any practical displeasure mere repentance, as it must have been had the doc. of any kind; yet this the argument supposes, since the trine against which we have contended been true. slightest infiction of punishment, should repentance John the Baptist was, emphatically, a preacher of retake place, would be contrary to the principle assumed. pentance, and, had nothing but mere repentance been If justice be taken in the sense of giving to every one required in order to salvation, he would liave been the what is due, the Divine Being cannot be just in this most successful of preachers. So numerous were the sense, should he treat an offender, though afterward multitudes which submitted to the power of his minis. penitent, precisely as he treats those who have perse- try, that the largest terms are used by the evangelist vered in obedience, without deicet of any kind; and Matthew to express the effect produced by it--"Then yet, if repentance be pleaded as a moral reason for en- went out all Judea, and all Jerusalem, and all the region tirely overlooking offence, then will all be treated alike, round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jorwhether obedient or the contrary. But, finally, if the dar, confessing their sins.” Of the truth of their rejustice of God be considered with reference to govern pentance, no doubt is expressed. On the contrary, ment, the impossibility of exonerating a penitent of- when John excepts only “many of the Sadducees and fender, and the upholding of a righteous administra- | Pharisees” who came “to bis baptism” as hypocrites, tration, is most apparent. That we are under govern- we are bound to conclude, that he, who appears to have ment is certain; that we are under a setiled law is had the supernatural gift of discovering the spirits of equally so, and that law explains to us the nature of men, allowed the repentance of the rest generally to the government by which we are controlled. In all be genuine. It would follow, then, from the principle the statements made respecting this government in laid down by the adversaries of the doctrine of the Scripture, the government of earthly sovereigns and atonement of Christ, namely, that repentance alone magistrates is the shadow under which it is repre- reuders morally fit in God to forgive sin, and that, sented, and the one is the perfect model after which therefore, he can require nothing else but true repentthe other has been imperfectly framed. Nothing that ance in order to pardon, that the disciples of the Bapis said of God being a father is ever adduced to lower tist needed not to look for any thing beyond what their nis claims as Lord, or to diminish the reverence and master was the instrument of imparting by his minisfear of his creatures towards him under that character. try. But this is contradicted by the fact. He taught The penalty of transgression is DeaTII. This is too them to look for a higher baptism, that of the Holy plainly written in the Scriptures to be for a moment Ghost; and to a more effectual teacher, the Christ, denied, and if it were righteous to attach that penalty whose voice or herald he was; all he did and said bore to offence, it is most certainly righteous to execute it; upon it a preparatory character, and to this character and, therefore, administrative justice cannot be main- he was most careful to give the utmost distinctness, tained if it be not cxecuted. As to the impenitent, this, that his hearers might not be mistaken. To two of his indeed, is conceded; but penitence makes no difference; disciples, standing with him when “he looked upon for, if the end of attaching this penalty to ofience was Jesus as he walked,” he said, “Behold the Lamb of to maintain the authority of the law, then not to exe God which taketh away the sin of the world;" and cate it upon the repentant would still be to annul that thus he confessed that it was not himself, nor his docauthority. This repentance is either in the power of trine, nor the repentance which it produced, which tonk the transgressor, or it is not. If the former, he will awar sin; but that it was taken away by Christ alone, always be disposed to exercise it, when the danger ap. and that in his sacrificial character, as "the Lamb of God." Nay, what, indeed, is still more explicit, he him- | this respect, important, that they concede that the death self declares that everlasting life was not attained by of Christ, as the means of human salvation, is made the repentance which he preached, but by believing on so prominent in the New Testament, that it cannot be Christ; for he concludes his discourse concerning left out of our consideration when the doctrine of man's Jesus (John iii. 25, 36) with these memorable words, salvation is treated of; and also, that this is a doctrine of “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life; the Holy Scriptures which must, in some way or other, and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but be accounted for and explained. The Socinian accounts the wrath of God abideth on him.” . The testimony of for it by making the death of Christ the means by which John was, therefore, that more than repentance, even repentance is produced in the heart of man, so as to faith in Christ, was necessary to salvation. Such constitute it morally fit that he should be forgiven. The also was the doctrine of our Lord himself, though he, modern Arian accounts for it by connecting with this too, was a preacher of repentance; and that of the notion that kind of merit in the death of Christ which apostles, who, proclaiming that “all men every where” | arises from a generous and benevolent self-devotion; should repent, not less explicitly preached that all men and which, when pleaded by him in the way of mediaevery where should believe; and that they were “justi- tion, God is pleased to honour by accepting repentance, fied by faith," and thus had "peace with God through when it is produced in the heart, and accompanied with our Lord Jesus Christ."

purposes of amendment in place of perfect obedience.

2. But the views given us of the death of Christ by

the writers of the New Testament, go much farther CHAPTER XX.

than these, because they represent the death of Christ REDEMPTION.-DEATH OF CHRIST PROPITIATORY.

as necessary to the salvation of men, a principle which

both the hypotheses just mentioned wholly exclude. THESE points, then, being so fully established, that The reason of forgiveness is placed by one in repentsin is neither forgiven by the mere prerogative of God, ance merely; by the other also in the exercise of the nor upon the account of mere repentance in man, we right which God had to pardon, but which he chose to proceed to inquire into the Scripture account of the real exercise in honour of the philanthropy of Jesus Christ. consideration on which the execution of the penalty of Both make the death of Christ, though in a different transgression is delayed, and the offer of forgiveness is way and in a very subordinate sense, the means of obmade to offenders.

taining pardon, because it is a means of bringing men To the statements of the New Testainent we shall into a state in which they are fit objects for the exerfirst direct our attention, and then point out that har- cise of an act of grace; but the Scripture doctrine is, mony of doctrine on this subject which pervades the that the death of Christ is not the meritorious means, whole Scriptures, and makes both the Old and New but the meritorious cause of the exercise of forgiveTestaments give their agreeing testimony to that one ness; and repentance but one of the instrumental method of love, wisdom, and justice, by which a mer- means of actually obtaining it; and in consistency ciful God justifies the ungodly.

with this view, they speak of the death of Christ, not 1. The first thing which strikes every attentive and, as one of many means, by which the same end might indeed, every cursory reader of the New Testament, have been accomplished; but as, in the strictest sense, must be, that the pardon of our sin, and our entire sal- necessary to man's salvation. vation, is ascribed to the death of Christ.

We do not, This has, indeed, been considered, even by some now, inquire in what sense his death availed to these divines professing orthodoxy, to be a bold position, but, great results; but we, at present, only state that, in as we shall see, with little consistency on their part. some sense, our salvation is expressly and emphati- It follows, of course, from the Socinian and Arian hycally conuected with that event." I lay down my life potheses, that if our Lord were a man or an angelic for ihe sheep." "He gave himself for us." He died, creature; and if he were rather the mere messen"the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God.” ger of a mercy which might be exercised on preroga“Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many." tive, than the procuring cause of it; any other creature “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us.” “In beside himself might have conveyed the message of this whom we have redemption through his blood, the for- mercy, might have exhibited a generous devotion in giveness of our sins." "ile gave his life a ransom for our behalf, and been an effectual instrument to bring many.” “We who were afar off are inade nigh by the men to that repentance which would prepare them to Vlood of Christ.” “Unto him that loved us, and washed receive it. But when it is admitted that Christ was us from our sins in his own blood ;with innumerable the Divine Son of God; that he was “God manifest in other passages, in which, with equal emphasis, the sal- the flesh;” that the forgiveness of sin required a satisvation of man is connected with the death of Christ. faction to Divine justice of so noble and infinitely ex

This is so undeniable, that it is, to a certain extent, alted a kind as that which was offered by the sufferings recognised in the two great schemes opposed to that and death of the incarnate Deity; even from such prewhich has been received generally by the church of mişes alone it would seem necessarily to follow, that but Christ, which in all ages has proclaimed that the death for the interposition of Christ, sin could not have been of Christ was an expiatory sacritice for the sins of men, forgiven consistently with a perfectly righteous govern. and necessary to make the exercise of pardon consis- ment, and therefore not forgiven at all, unless a sacritent with the essential righteousness of God, and with fice of equal merit, which supposes a being of equal his righteous government. The Socinian scheme ad- glory and dignity as its subject, could have been found. mits that the death of Christ was important to con- if no such being existed out of the Godhead, then hufirm his doctrine, and to lead to his resurrection, the man hope rested solely on the voluntary incarnation crowning miracle by which its truth was demonstrated; of the Son of God; and the overwhelming fact and and that we have redemption through his blood, the mystery of his becoming flesh in order to suffer for us, forgiveness of sins, because “we are led, by the due itself shows that the case to be remedied was one of a consideration of Christ's death and its consequences, character absolutely extreme, and therefore not otherto that repentance which, under the merciful consti- wise remediable. If inferior means had been sufficient, tution of the Divine government, always obtains for- then more was done by the Father, when he delivered up giveness.” The second scheme, which is that of the his Son for us, than was necessary; a conclusion of an modern Arians, goes farther. It represents the coming impious character: and if the greatest possible gift was of Christ, whom they consider to be the most exalted bestowed, then nothing less could have been effectual of the creatures of God, into the world, and his labours and this was necessary to human salvation. Every beand sufferings in behalf of men as acts of the most dis- liever in the Divinity of Christ is bound to this conclusion. interested and tender benevolence, in reward and honour This matter is, however, put beyond all reasonable of which he is allowed to bestow pardon upon his dis question by the testimony of Scripture. “Thus it is ciples, upon their sincere repentance, and io plead his written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer and to rise interest with God, who delights to honour the generous from the dead.” Here a necessity for the death of conduct of his Son towards the human race.

His vo

Christ is plainly expressed. If it be said that the neluntary sufferings and death for the sins of mankind, cessity was the fulfilment of what “had been written" according to them, gave to his intercession with God in the prophets concerning the sufferings of Messiah, great efficacy, and thus, by his mediation, sinners are it is to be remembered, that what was predicted on this reconciled to God, and raised to eternal life.

subject by the prophets arose out of a previous appointFar as even the latter of these theories falls below ment of God, in whose eternal counsel Christ had been the sense of Scripture on this subject, yet both are, in | designated as the Redeemer of man; and that the sole ing him.

end and reason of the death of Christ could not, there inform us that he died “For us," that is, in our room fore, be the mere fulfilment of the prophecies respect and stead. With this representation, neither of the

The verse which follows abundantly proves hypotheses to which we have adverted, as attempting this: " And that repentance and remission of sins to account for the importance attached to the death of should be preached in his name.” Luke xxiv. 47. His our Lord in the New Testament, agrees, and therefore death was not only necessary for the accomplishment both of them fall far below the whole truth of the of prophecy, but for the publication of “ repentance case. The Socinian scheme makes the death of Christ and remission of sins in his name,” both of which, only an incidental benefit, as sealing the truth of his therefore, depended upon it. It was God's purpose to doctrine, and setting an example of eminent passive offer forgiveness to man, before the prophets issued virtue. In this sense, indeed, they acknowledge that their predictions; it was his purpose to do this in “his he died “for" men, because in this indirect manner name," on account of and in consideration of his dying they derive the benefit of instruction from his death, for them: this' was predicted; but the necessity of the and because some of the motives to virtue are placed in death of Christ rested on this previous appointment to a stronger light. The modern Arian scheme, somewhich the prophecies corresponded. In Matthew xvi. times called the intercession hypothesis, acknowledges 21, the same sentiment is expressed, without any re- that he acquired, by his disinterested and generous ference to the fulfilment of prophecy. “From that sufferings, the highest degree of virtue, and a powerful time forth began Jesus to show unto his disciples, how interest with God, by which his intercession on behalf that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many of penitent offenders is honoured by an exercise of things of the elders, and chief priests, and scribes, and higher mercy than would otherwise have taken place; be killed, and be raised again the third day.” The an- but it by no means follows from this, that repentance swer, too, of our Lord to Peter, who upon this declara- might not otherwise have taken place, and mercy have tion, said, “Be it far from thee, Lord : this shall not be been otherwise exercised. According to this view, unto thee,” is remarkable. “But he turned and said then, Christ died for the benefit indeed of men, someunto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan ; thou art an what more directly than on the Socinian Scheme; but offence to me; for thou savourest not the things that he did not die for them in the sense of the Scriptures, be of God, but those that be of men.” These words that is, in their room and stead; his death was not vi. plainly imply, that for Christ to suffer and die, and in carious, and it is not on that account directly that the this manner, and not according to the carnal and hu- guilty are absolved from condeinnation. man views of Peter, to accomplish the purpose of his To prove that our Lord died for men, in the sense of coming into the world, was “ of God;" it was his dying in their stead, the testimony of the sacred writers purpose, his appointment. This is not language to be must, however, be adduced, and it is equally abundant used as to a martyr dying to prove liis sincerity; for and explicit. St. Peter says he died, “the just for the death, in such cases, is rather permitted than purposed unjust,” that “ he suffered for us." St. Paul, that “he and appointed, and it would be to adopt language never died for all,” that he tasted death for every man," applied to such cases in the Holy Scriptures, to say that he died" for the ungodly,” that " he gave himself that the sufferings and death of martyrs are "of God." a ransom for all," and our Lord himself declares "that The necessity of Christ's death, then, rested on Divine he gave himself a ransom for many." To show, how. appointment, and that on the necessity of the case; ever, that this phrase means no more than a final and if he “must" die in order that we might live, then cause, and that the only notion intended to be conveyed we live only in consequence of his death.

is, that Christ died for our benefit, it is argued by the The same view is conveyed by a strongly figurative objectors, that the Greek prepositions used in the above expression in John xii. 23, 24: "And Jesus answered quotations, untep and avti, do not always signify subthem, saying, The hour is come that the Son of Man stilution ; but are sometimes to be rendered" on acshould be glorified. Verily, verily, I say unto you, count of;" as when Christ is said to have“ suffered for Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it our sins," which cannot be rendered instead of our abideih alone; but if it die, it bringeth forth much sins. All this may, indeed, be granted ; but then it is fruit." From which it inevitably follows, that the as certain that these prepositions do often signify subdeath of Christ was as necessary to human salvation stitution; and that the Grecks, by these forms of exas the vegetable death of the seed of corn to the pro- pression, were wont to express a vicarious death, is duction of the harvest; necessary, therefore, in ihis abundantly proved by the examples given by Raphelius, sense, that one could not take place without the other. on Romans v. 8. Nor are instances wanting of texts But for this he would have remained "alone,” and have in which these particles can only be interpreted when brought no “sons to glory.”

taken in the sense of "instead of,” and in “ the place In a word, all those passages of Scripture which of.” So in the speech of Caiaphas, “It is expedient *peak of our salvation from death and misery by the that one man should die (Utrep) for the people, and ibat sufferings of Christ, and call upon our gratitude on the whole nation perish not ;' he plainly declares, tbat this account, are founded upon the same doctrine. either Christ or the nation must perish; and that, by These are too numerous to be cited, and are sufficiently putting the former to death, he would die instead of the familiar. “We have redemption through his blood;" vation. In Romans v. 6-8, the sense in which Christ “ We are saved from wrath through him," &c. Such “died for us” is indubitably fixed by the context. “For forms of speech are continually occurring, and the scarcely for a righteous man will one die, yet peradhighest ascriptions of praise are given to the Father venture for a good man some would even dare to die; and to the Son on this account. But most clearly, they but God commendeth his love towards us, in that while all suppose that “wrath” and “deatli," but for this in- we were yet sinners, Christ died for us;" on which terposition of the passion of Christ on our account, passage Doddridge has observed, “ One can hardly imawould have been the doom of sinning men. They con- gine any one would die for a good man, unless it were tain not the most distant intimation, that had not be to redeem his life by giving up his own.” In this sense come into the world " to seek and to save them that also, avri is used by the LXX. 2 Sam. xviii. 33, where were lost,” they would have been saved by any other, David says concerning Absalom, "Would to God I had means; that had not he, the good Shepherd, laid down died for thee,” (avti cov.) Here he could mean nothing his life for the sheep, they would have been brought by else but to wish that he had died in Absalom's stead. some other process into the heavenly fold. The very em- In the sense of " in the room or stead of,” avri is also phasis of the expression “ lost" implies a desperate case, used in many places of the New Testament; as “Arfor as lost they could not have been described, it pardon chelaus did reign in Judea (avti) in the room of his had been offered them on mere repentance; and if the father Herod ;" * If he ask a fishi, will he (avri) for a death of Christ had been one only of many means, fish (in place or instead of a fish), give him a serpent ?" through some of which that disposition of God to for- When, therefore, the same preposition is used, Mark give offenders must have operated, which is the doc- x. 45, " The Son of Man came to give his life a ransom trine of all who set up the goodness of the Divine go- for (avri) many,” there can surely be no reason drawn vernment against its justice. In that case, mankind from the ineaning of the particle itself to prevent its could not have been in a hopeless state, independent being so understood. That it may be so taken is cerof Christ's redemption, the view which is uniformly tain, for this is a sense of the preposition constantly taken of their caso in Scripture, where the death of occurring; and if that sense is rejected, and another Christ is exhibited, not as one expedient of many, but chosen, the reason must be brought from the contraas the only hope of the guilty.

riety of the doctrine which it conveys to some other; 3. The Scriptures, in speaking of the death of Christ, whereas not one passage is even pretended to be pro

[ocr errors]

duced, which denies that Christ did thus die in the In the same manner, the Latins say, to give or render stead of the ungodly, and give his life a ransom in the thanks (pro beneficiis) for benefits, as often in Cicero. place or stead of the lives of many. The particles VTED IIe also says to take vengeance (pro injuriis) for injuand avri liave other senses; this is not denied; but as ries;' 'to suffer punishment (pro magnitudine sceleris) Bishop Stillingfleet has observed, “ a substitution could for the greatness of a crime;' to fear torments (pro not be more properly expressed ihan it is in Scripture maleficiis) for evil deeds. Plautus, 'to chastise (pro by them.”

commerita noxia) for faults which deserve it.' And The force of this has at all times been felt by the Terence, “to take vengeance (pro dictis et factis) for Socinians, and has rendered it necessary for them to words and deeds. Certainly, in all these places, pro resort to subterfuges. Socinus acknowledges, and does not signify a final, but an impulsive cause. So, atter him Crellius, that “when redemption is spoken when Christ is said to have suffered and died for sins, of, avrı implies commutation ;” but they attempt to the subject will not allow us, as Socinus wishes, to escape, by considering both the redemption and the understand a final cause Hence, also, as the Hebrew cominutation metaphorical. Dr. Priestley, too, admits particle in denotes an antecedent or impulsive cause the probability of the interpretation of Christ's dying (see Psalm xxxviii. 9, and many other places), the words for us, being to die instead of us, and then contends of Isaiah liii. cannot be better translated, or more agreethat he did this consequentially and not directly so, ably with other scriptures, than He was wounded on "as a substitute for us ; for if, in consequence of account of our transgressions; he was bruised on acChrist's not having been sent to instruct and reform count of our iniquities. And what can Romans vi. 10, the world, mankind had continued unreformed, and if the necessary consequence of Christ's coming was his in apapīra aneDavev, denote, but that he died on ac

count of sin ?" death, by whatever means, and in whatever manner it

Crellius, who attempted an answer to Grotius, at was brought about; it is plain that there was, in fact, length acknowledges sin to have been an impulsive no other alternative but his death or ours."(3) Thus, cause of the death of Christ; but neutralizes the adunder the force of the doctrine of the New Testament, mission by sophistry, on which Bishop Stillingfleet has that Christ died in our stead, he admits the absolute well observed, that we understand not an impulsive necessity of the death of Christ in order to human sal

cause in so remote a sense, as though our sins were an vation, contrary to all the principles he elsewher: lays occasion of Christ's dying, so that his death was one down, and in refutation of his own objections and those argument, among many others, to believe his doctrine, of his followers to the orthodox view of the death of the belief of which would cause men to leave their our Saviour as being the only means by which mercy sins; but we contend, for a nearer and more proper could be dispensed to mankind. But that Christ died sense, that the death of Christ was primarily intended for us directly as a substitute, which is still the point for the expiation of sins, with respect to God, and not denied, is to be fully proved from those Scriptures, in to us, and that our sins, as au impulsive cause, are to which he is said to have borne the punishment due to be considered as so displeasing to God, that it was neour offences; and this being established, it puts an cessary, for the vindication of honour and the deterring entire end to all quibbling on the import of the Greek the world from sin, that no less a sacrifice of atonement prepositions.

should be offered than the blood of the Son of God.--To prove this, the passages of holy writ are exceed. The sufferings of Christ, when considered with respect ingly numerous; but it will be more satisfactory to to our sins, are to be considered as a punishment; when select a few, and point out their force, than to give a long with respect to God, as being designed to expiate them list of citations.

as a sacrifice of atonement. Grotius(4) thus clearly proves that the Scriptures re- It is thus that Christ is said to bear our sins. " Who present our sins as the impulsive cause of the death of his ownself bare our sins in his own body on the tree." Christ :

I Peter ii. 24, where the apostle evidently quotes from " Another cause which moved God was our sins, Isaiah liii. “He shall bear their iniquities.” “He bore which deserve punishment. Christ was delivered for the sin of many.” The same expression is used by our offences. Rom. iv. 28. IIere the apostle uses the pre- St. Paul (Heb. ix. 28), “ So Christ was once offered to position dia with the accusative case, which with all bear the sins of many." Now to bear sin is, in the lanGreck authors, sacred and profane, is the most usual guage of Scripture, to bear the punishment of sin,(5) manner of expressing an impulsive cause. For in- and the use of the compound verb avapɛpw, by both stance, dia tavra, “because of these things cometh the apostles, is worthy of notice. St. Peter'"might have wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Eph. said simply nveyke, he bore; but wishing at the same v. 6. Indeed, whenever the expression, because of sins, time to signify his being lifted np on the cross, he said is coupled with the mention of sufferinys, it never ad- avnveyke, he bore up, incaning, he bore by going up mits of any other interpretation. I will chastise you to the cross.”(6) St. Paul, too, uses the same verb with seven times, because of your sins.' Levit. xxvi. 28. reference to the Levitical sacrifices, which were carried • Because of these abominations the Lord God cast

to an elevated altar; and to the sacrifice of Christ. Sothem out from his sight.? Deut. xviii. 12. So it is used cinus and his followers cannot deny that to bear sin, in in many other places of the sacred writings, and no Scripture generally, signifies to bear the punishment of where in a different sense. The expression, for sins, sin; but, availing themselves of the very force of the is also evidently of the same force, whenever it is con- compound verb avagepw, just pointed out, they internected with sufferings, as in the example following : pret the passage in St. Peter to signify the bearing up, . Christ died for our sins.' I Cor. xv. 3. . Christ hath (ihat is, the bearing or carrying away of our sins, which, once suffered for sins.' 1 Peter iii. 18. 'Christ gave according to ihem, may be effected in many other ways himself for our sins.' Gal. i. 4. Christ offered one than by a vicarious sacrifice. To this, Grotius replies, sacrifice for sins.' Heb. x. 12. In all which places we “the particle ava will not admit of such a sense, nor is have either vtep or repi with the genitive case. But the word ever so used by any Greek writer. In the Socinus maintains, that in all these places a final and New Testament it never occurs in such a meaning.” not an impulsive cause is intended. He even goes so it is also decisive as to the sense in which St. Peter far as to assert, that the Latin pro and the Greek UTTEP uses the phrase to bear sin, that he quotes from Isaiah never denote an impulsive, but always a final cause. lii. 11, “Tor he shall bear their iniquities," where the Many examples prove the latter assertion to be untrue. Hebrew word, by the confession of all, is never used for For both unrep and Tepi are used to signify no less an taking away, hui for bearing a burden, and is employed impulsive than a final cause. The Gentiles are said to to express the punishment of sin, as in Lamentations praise God vtep ɛlɛys for his mercy. Rom. xv. 9. - v.7. “Our fathers have sinned, and are not, and we Paul says thanks are given vtep nuwv for us. Eph. have borne their iniquities.i. 16. And Utep martwv for all; Eph. v. 20.

Similar to this expression of bearing sins, and equally you' VTED XOLOTOV for Christ. 2 Cor. v. 20. Great is impracticable to the criticism of the Socinians, is the my glorying for you'vtep vpov. 2 Cor. vii. 4, ix. 2, declaration of Isaian in the same chapter," he was and xii. 5. Distresses (UTED XPLOty) for Christ. 2 Cor. wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our xii. 10. “I thank God (unep vuiwv) for you.' 1 Cor. i. 4. iniquities;" and then to show in what sense he was "God shall reprove all ine ungodlý (tepi navrwv epyov wounded and bruised for our transgressions, he adds, Qtbelas) for all their works of ungodliness.' Jude 15. “the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with (3) Iristory of Corruptions, &c.

(5) Leviticus xxii. 9. Ezekiel xviii. 20. (?) De Satisfactione.

(6) GROTils.

. We pray

his stripes we are healed.” Now, chastisement is the Deut. xxi. 22, 23: "If a man have committed a sin punishment of a fault; but the suffering person, of worthy of death, and be put to death, and they hang whom the prophet speaks, is declared by him to be him on a tree; his body shall not remain all night upon wholly free from transgression; to be perfectly and em- the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day, phatically innocent. This prophecy is applied to Christ for he that is hanged is accursed of God, that thy land by the apostles, whose constant doctrine is the entire im- be not defiled.” This infamy was only inflicted upon maculateness of their master and Lord. If chastise- great offenders, and was designed to show the light in ment, therefore, was laid upon Christ, it could not be which the person, thus exposed, was viewed by Godon account of faults of his own; his sufferings were he was a curse or execration. On this, the remarks of the chastisement of our faults, the price of our peace, Grotius are most sorcible and conclusive. “Socinus and his “stripes," another punitive expression, were says, that to be àn execration means to be under the borne by him for our“healing.” The only course which punishment of execration, which is true. For karapa Socinus and his followers have taken, to endeavour to every where denotes punishment proceeding from the escape the force of this passage is to render the word sanction of law. 1 Peter ii. 24. Mark xv. 41. Sonot chastisement, but affliction in answer to which, cinus also admits, that the cross of Christ was this Grotius and subsequent critics have abundantly proved curse; his cross, therefore, had the nature of punishthat it is used not to signify aliction of any kind; but ment, which is what we maintain. Perhaps Socinus that which has the nature of punishment. These pas- allows that the cross of Christ was a punishment, be. sages, therefore, prove a substitution, a suffering in cause Pilate, as a judge, inflicted it; but this does not our stead. The chastisement of offences was laid come up to the intention of the apostle; for, in order to upon him, in order to our peace; and the offences were prove that Christ was made obnoxious to punishment, ours, since they could not be his "who did no sin, nei- he cites Moses, who expressly asserts, that whoever ther was guile found in his mouth."

hangs on a tree, according to the Divine law, is 'acThe same view is presented to us under another, and cursed of God-consequently, in the words of the even still more forcible phrase, in the 6th and 7th verses apostle, who cites this place of Moses, and refers it to of the same chapter. «All we like sheep have gone Christ, we must supply the same circumstance, acastray, we ha turned every one to his own way, and cu of God, as if he had said Christ was made the Lord hath laid on him (literally hath made to meet accursed of God, or obnoxious to the highest and most on him) the iniquity of us all; he was oppressed and ignominious punishment for us, that the blessing of he was afflicted.” Bishop Lowth translates this pas- Abraham might come upon the Gentiles,' &c. For when sage, “ and the Lord hath made to light upon him the the apostles speak of the sufferings of Christ in reference iniquity of us all; it was exacted and he was made to our good, they do not regard the acts of men in them, answerable.” In a similar manner, several former cri- but the act of God."(9) tics,(7) “ he put or fixed together upon him the iniquity 4. We are carried still farther into the real nature and of us all, it was exacted and he was afflicted." This design of the death of Christ, by those passages of Holy sense is fully established by Grotius against Socinus, Scripture which connect with it propitiation, atonement, and by Bishop Stillingfieet against Crellius, and thus reconciliation, and the making peace between God and the passage is obviously incapable of explanation, ex- man; and the more attentively these are considered, cept by allowing the sufferings and death of our Lord the more unfounded will the Socinian notion appear, to be vicarious. Our iniquities, that is, according to the which represents the death of Christ as, indirectly Hebrew mode of speaking, their punishment, are made only, a benefit to us, and as saving us from our sins to meet upon him; they are fixed together and laid upon and their punishment only as it is a motive to repentance him; the penalty is exacted from him, though he him- and virtue. self had incurred no penalty personally, and, therefore, To propitiate is to appease, to atone, to turn away the it was in consequence of that vicarious exaction that wrath of an offended person. In the case before us the he was “afflicted,” was “made answerable," and, vo- wrath turned away is the wrath of God; the person luntarily submitting," he opened not his mouth." making the propitiation is Christ, the propitiating

In 2 Cor. v. 21, the apostle uses almost the same lan- offering or sacrifice is his blood. All this is expressed, guage. “For he hath made him to be sin sa sin-offer- in most explicit terms, in the following passages: 1 John ing) for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made ii. 2, “And he is the propitiation for our sins.” ] John the righteousness of God in him.” The Socinian Im- iv. 10, “Herein is love, not that we loved God; but proved Version has a note on this passage so obscure that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation that the point is evidently given upin despair. Socinus for our sins.” Rom. iii. 25, “Whom God hath set forth before had attempted an elusive interpretation, which to be a propitiation through faith in his blood.The requires scarcely an effort to refute. By Christ's be- word used in the two former passages is iacuos; in the ing made“ sin,” he would understand being esteemed last idaotnplov. Both are from the verb educaw, so a sinner by men. But, as Grotius observes,(8) neither often used, by Greek writers, to express the action of a is the Greek word, translated sin, nor the Hebrew word person, who, in some appointed way, turned away the answering to it, ever taken in such a sense. Besides, wrath of a Deity; and, therefore, cannot bear the sense the apostle has attributed this act to God; it was he which Socinus would put upon it,---the destruction of who made him to be sin : but he certainly did not cause sin. This is not supported by a single example: with the Jews and others to esteem Christ a wicked man. all Greek authorities, whether poets, historians, or On the contrary, hy a voice from heaven, and by mira- others, the word means to propitiate, and is, for the most racles, he did all that was proper to prove to all men his part, construed with an accusative case, designating the innocence. Farther, St. Paul places“ sin” and “righte- person whose displeasure is averted.(1) As this could ousness” in opposition to each other—“ we are made not be denied, Crellius comes to the aid of Socinus, and the righteousness of God," that is, are justified and contends, that the sense of this word was not to be freed from Divine punishment; but, in order to this, taken from its common use in the Greek tongue; but Christ was made sin," or bore our punishment. There from the Hellenistic use of it, namely, its use in the is also another antithesis in the apostle's words-God Greek of the New Testament, the LXX., and the Apomade him who knew no sin, and consequently de- crypha. But this will not serve him; for, both by the served no punishment, to be sin ; that is, it pleased him, LXX. and in the Apocrypha it is used in the same sense that he should be punished; but Christ was innocent, as in the Greek classic writers. Ezekiel xliv. 27, “He not only according to human laws, but according to the shall offer his sin-offering (elaouov) saith the Lord law of God; the antithesis, therefore, requires us to God;" Ezekiel xlv. 19, “ And the priest shall take of the understand, that he bore the penalty of the law, and blood of the sin-offering, ešedaous." Num. v. 8, “The that he bore it in our stead.

ram of the atonement,κριος τ8 ιλασμο; to which may How explicitly the death of Christ is represented in be added, out of the Apocrypha, 2 Maccabees iii. 33, the New Testament as penal, which it could not be in “Now as the high priest was making an atonement," any other way than by his taking our place, and suf-daquov. The propitiatory sense of the word laquos fering in our stead, is manifest also from Galatians iii. being thus fixed, the modern Socinians have conceded, 13, “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the in their note on John ii. 2, in their Improved Version, law, being made a curse [an execration) for us, for it is that it means the pacifying of an offended party ; but written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.” | they subjoin, that Christ is a propitiation, because “by The passage in Moses, to which St. Paul refers, is

(9) De Satisfactione. i (7) Vide Poli Synop. (8) De Satisfactione.

(1) GROTIUS De Satisfactione,

« PreviousContinue »