SERMON XXXII.

THE LAMB IN THE MIDST OF HIS FATHER'S THRONE.

REV. v. 6.

And I beheld and lo in midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain.

In thinking of the exaltation of Christ we must not be careful to separate the two natures, and discriminate between the honors of the man and the honors of the God. With all this complex glory he has but one Person, and it is not so properly the glory of the man nor of the God, but of the Mediator. By a separation of the two natures, and a failure to carry through all the periods and modes of his existence the idea of the same Person, much confusion has been introduced and some error. Thus when the Son of man is represented as coming down from heaven and returning to heaven, it has been inferred that his human nature must have had a previous existence, as the God could not change place. But this inference is made without

considering that the same Person, the same Mediator, that was displayed in heaven, was afterwards displayed on earth, and then appeared in heaven again. He was the Mediator before his humanity existed. Then the scene of his display was heaven. When he became incarnate and appeared on earth, there were not two Mediators, one in heaven and another on earth. Earth then became the scene of the display of the one Mediator, as heaven had been before. The whole Mediator looked out of the eyes and spoke out of the lips of Jesus of Nazareth. When John approached him on earth and beheld him and worshipped him, though he saw nothing but the man, he saw the Person who constituted the only Mediator in existence: he saw the Person who had been displayed in heaven as the Mediator, and was now displayed as the Mediator on earth, and of course might be said to have come down from heaven. This carrying through all the states of his existence the idea of the same Person, the same Mediator, would prevent that misconstruction of texts which has led to a denial of his divinity, as well as that which has led others into the idea of the pre-existence of his human soul.

In this vision John had a view of the exaltation of the Saviour, and of something to remind him of the state from which he had been raised, the sufferings through which he had passed, and the true cause of his exaltation. He saw him in the midst of his Father's throne, surrounded by adoring saints and angels; but he saw him as the Lamb which had been slain, with all the marks of his

death upon him. It was as the Lamb slain that he was exalted. In this view John had notices of the atonenient made by his passion, and of the glorious rewards of his obedience "unto death." He beheld in a figure what the Saviour had done and endured on earth, and what he had found in heaven. All his sufferings and work in this lower world, and all his reward and glory in the world above, were set forth, directly or indirectly, in this single picture; and it may lead us to cast a view over the whole.

I. There were notices of the atonement made by his sufferings. "A Lamb as it had been slain." He is called a Lamb in reference to the paschal lamb and other lambs offered in sacrifice under the old dispensation. These fully represented him who was meek, patient, unresisting, and who uttered no complaint against his murderers. They resembled him in that none were selected but those without blemish. But the point in which they were chiefly intended to set him forth, was that they were offered as a typical expiation for sin, their life being taken in lieu of the life of the transgressor.

If men were to be pardoned, it was necessary that Christ should die to answer the precise end of their punishment; that is, to convince the universe, as much as their punishment would have done, that God was determined to execute the penalty of his law on future offenders. The practical exhibition of this resolution was necessary to support the authority of the law, while, as a consequence, it showed God's love of holiness and hatred of sin,

and his inflexible determination to be rigorously just towards future offenders. These ends were all that could be accomplished by the punishment of transgressors; and these being fully answered by the death of Christ, it became consistent with the authority of the law, not indeed to shield incorrigible transgressors; (that would have ruined the law ;) but to extend pardon to the penitent and reclaimed. This was the precise end of the atonement; and this end was answered by the sufferings of Christ in our stead.

II. There were notices of the glorious rewards of his obedience. He was in the midst of the throne, surrounded by the living creatures and the elders, (the representatives of the whole Church,) who were offering their adorations and thanksgivings. This, and every other part of his exaltation, he received as the reward of his obedience "unto death." "Being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became OBEDIENT unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him and given him a name which is above every name, [to wit, the name of the Son of God;] that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father."

If there were any reasons why Christ should obey, distributive justice required that he should receive a glorious reward. And it was desirable in itself that there should stand forth one pre-emi

nent instance of the rewards of obedience, in order to show to the universe with what readiness and fulness God recompenses conformity to his law; thereby to exhibit how infinitely attached he is to holiness. Further, if it was necessary for Christ to be under law, it was necessary for him to obey in order to be holy, and of course in order to be accepted as an expiation; inasmuch as the sufferings of a sinner would have been deserved by himself, and could not have atoned for others. But it was necessary for him to be under law, that is, off the throne, that the stroke of the lawgiver might fall upon him, and that he might give satisfaction to one sitting on the throne and holding the rights of the Godhead. It was necessary that he should obey in the article of his death, that the stroke might manifestly come from the Lawgiver; for in no way could the Lawgiver officially strike but by commanding him to receive the blow. Nor could the Father in any character lay the stroke upon him, but either by forcing it upon one struggling against his authority, (in which case it would have been the sufferings of a sinner and of no efficacy to atone for others,) or by inflicting it upon one wholly ignorant of what was to happen, (which does not accord with Christ's frequent prediction of his death,) or by commanding him to die, and by his obediently yielding to the stroke. It was necessary for him to be obedient that he might be the well beloved Son; that so the Father's stroke might be as expressive of his determination to punish transgressors, as the eternal destruction of Adam's race