Imágenes de páginas

"Numb. xiv. 20. 1 Sam. vii. 8—10. Job "xlii. 7, 8. Jer. xv. 1. Ezek. xiv. 13—20. "So Phineas, by executing an act of justice, "turned away the wrath of God from the "children of Israel, Numb. xxv. 11 —



§. 26. Between the nature of the cases here mentioned, and that of sacrifices, there is such a dissimilarity, that no argument can be taken from the one to illustrate the other. The obedience of Abraham was, indeed, a medium by which blessings were conveyed to his posterity, and, perhaps, a reason for the conveyance of them: but then his obedience was no sacrifice; nor is it any where said, that it made atonement for the sins of his posterity, or that it procured the remission of sin for any one of them. And, therefore, no argument can be taken from the efficacy and effect of Abraham's obedience to illustrate the nature, efficacy, and effect of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.—In like manner, the prayers and righteousness of Moses and other good men, and an act of justice executed by Phineas, were the means of averting the wrath and judgments


f See Scripture-doctrine of Atonement examined, Chap. X. §. 162.

of God from other persons: and they are actually said to have atoned, or made atonement, for their sins: but then, these prayers and acts of righteousness of Moles and other good men, and the act of justice which was: executed by Phineas, were not sacrifices ;, and. the atonements, which were made by them, as the Dr. very well observes, were extra-levitical, and such as had no relation to sacrifices m.—Not to enlarge here; before the Dr. can make any of the cases, here alledged, subservient to his purpose, he must prove two things, which I despair of ever seeing proved. He must prove, (1.) that prayer, acts of righteousness, justice, and virtue, are true and proper sacrifices. And, (2.) that the sacrifice, which Christ offered, was the perfect obedience and goodness of his whole life.—The proof of the last of these the Dr. has attempted, and has, I think, altogether failed in the attempt. And for the first, instead of proving it, he hath overthrown it by his very definitions of sacrifice, by which he makes sacrifices to be, not prayer, nor acts of righteousness, justice, and virtue; but symbols or emblems of prayer and praise, and of the internal desires, affections, dispositions, and virtues of the mind.


"> See Scripture-doctrine of Atonement examined, Chap, V. §. 70. and Chap. VI. §. 107.

Upon the whole, since, in all the cases here produced by the Dr, the means, by which the effects were produced, were not sacrifices, but things of a different nature; and since, withal, the effect, in one of these cases, was not the remission of sin, but a different one; I may, I think, venture to conclude, that the Dr's notions of the nature and efficacy of Christ's sacrifice can receive no illustration, in the way of analogical reasoning, from any of these cases.

'the Dis Scripture illustrations continued.

§. 27. The Dr. adds, "And that the "scriptural notion of atonement will fairly "admit this way of accounting for our re"demption by Christ, he that hath care** fully perused the foregoing examination of "the scriptural-sense of atonement, will, I <c think, be convinced. For if, in various "instances, the virtue, piety, and prayers tc of good men, were the reason of God's "bestowing pardon, and sundry blessings, "upon others; how much more must the "perfect righteousness and goodness of the "son of God, be a reason for remitting the "sins of mankind"?"


» See Scripture-doctrine of Atonement examined, Chap. X. §. 163.

Answer. [-_,

§. 28. With the utmost care, have I read over and examined the Dr's examination of the scriptural-sense of extra-levitical atonements; and yet can receive no light from it, concerning the scripture-fense of Levitical or sacrifical atonements. And till the Dr. has cleared up the scriptural-sense of the last mentioned atonements, (which he % has neither done, nor attempted to do, as I have before (hewn,) his way of accounting for our redemption by Christ cannot, in reason, be admitted. Till this is done^ 'tis impossible to know, what the scripturalsense of sacrifical atonement is; or whether, it will, or will not, admit that way of accounting for our redemption by the sacrifice of Christ.—The Dr, indeed, has clearly proved, that the pardon of sin, and sundry other blessings, have been procured for other persons by extra-levitical atonements, that is, by the prayers, piety, and virtue of good men. But pray, what is this to his purpose? Were the prayers, piety, and virtue, by which these blessings were procured, true and proper sacrifices? The Dr. himself, by making sacrifices the symbols or emblems of them, and by acknowledging that the atonements, which were made by them, had no relation to sacrifices, declares

that they were not. Or can it be thought, that symbols and mere-shadows could have the fame efficacy, and produce the fame effect, as the substance itself? this is shocking to common sense. Or did sacrifical atonements, under the law of Moses, like extra-levitical atonements, procure blessings for any persons but the offerers? This, I presume, will not be affirmed. As far, therefore, as I can yet fee, the scriptural-sense of extra-levitical atonements affords us no light at all about the scriptural sense, or the nature and efficacy of Jewish sacrifices; and still less, if possible, about the nature, efficacy, and scriptural sense, of the sacrifice of Christ, by which we are redeemed. This last mentioned sacrifice, though offered by one whose obedience and goodness were perfect, yet, if we will believe the scriptures, it was not his perfect obedience and goodness, but death voluntarily chosen and submitted to, blood shed upon the cross, and offered to make atonement for the fins of mankind. How then should the nature and efficacy of this sacrifice admit the same way of being accounted for, as those of extra-levitical atonements, which were made by different means, such as prayer, and acts of piety, and virtue?

§.29. Having now finished my examination of the Dr's scripture-evidence, and scripture-illustrations, of' his notion of the


« AnteriorContinuar »