« AnteriorContinuar »
believe all that the prophets have spoken? Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to have entered into his glory? Then opened be their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures ; and said unto them, Thus it is written; and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day. In both these passages our Saviour asserts bis death to bave been due, or necessary; because it had been before declared by the prophets, and in the Scriptures; reproves the two disciples for not thus understanding and believing the prophets ; and teaches them, that this is the substance of all which the prophets bad spoken ; and the eleven, that to understand this great fact in a proper manner, is to understand the Scriptures themselves at large.
Gal. i. 4, · Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this evil world.' Hebrews i. 3,. When he bad by himself purged our sins.' 1 Peter ii. 24, · Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree; that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness : by whose stripes ye were healed.' 1 John iii. 5, IIe was manifested to take away our sins. Rev. i. 5, · Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God.'
In every one of these passages, as well as many others, it is evident beyond all debate, that Christ stood in the place of mankind,—bore their sins and healed them by the stripes which he suffered—that our iniquities were laid on him—that he washed our sins away—became a curse for us—was wounded for our transgressions—made reconciliation for ini. quity- and was cut off, not for himself, but for mankind. The same doctrine is taught with equal precision in many other forms of expression; but, I presume, it is unnecessary to add any thing farther on this part of the subject.
4. I argue the same doctrine from those passages, in which we are said to be forgiven, or • saved, for his sake, or in
Acts iv. 12, · Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved.' Acts xiii. 38, Be it known unto you, therefore, men and brethren, that through this may is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins.' 1 John ii. 12, I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake.' 1 Cor. vi. 11, · But ye are washed, but yo are sanctified, but ye are justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus.' Eph. iv. 32, . Even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.
Now it is plain, that we cannot be forgiven, washed, justified, or saved, for the sake of Christ, unless Christ was, in some sense or other, a substitute for us—stood in our place did something which we had failed to do—made amends for faults which we had committed-or in other words, made that atonement for sin which God was pleased to accept. Of the very same import aro those passages of the Old Testament, in which sin is said to be forgiven, and blessings to be bestowed, upon mankind by God, for his name's sake,' or for his own sake. In Exod. xxii. 21, God, speaking of his own Angel, says, Beware of him, and obey his voice;' and 'provoke hiin not; for he will not pardon your transgressions : for my name is in him.' The Jews of ancient times considered the name of God,' mentioned in a great number of passages in the Old Testament, as being no other than one appellation of the Messiah ; and construed those passages in which the forgiveness of sin was promised for the sake of the name of God, in some, and probably in all instances, as intending, and really though figuratively expressing, forgiveness for the sake of the Messiah. Thus, when in Isaiah xlviii. 9, God says, For my name's sake will I defer mine anger;' and in the 11th verse, • For mine own sake will I do it:' when the Psalmist says, Psalm xxv. 11, 'For thy name's sake pardon mine iniquity;' and Psalm cix. 21,- Do thou for me, O God, the Lord, for thy name's sake;' and Psalm cxliii. 11, Quicken me for thy name's sake;' and when the church says, Psalm lxxix. 9,
Help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of thy name; and deliver us, and purge away our sins for thy name's sake;' the phraseology is exactly equivalent to what it would be, if for the sake of Christ, had been substituted in each of these cases. This, however, is not mentioned as being necessary to' the proof of the doctrine in hand ; but as evidence that the same views of it are given us in both Testaments.
On the same ground we are required to offer up our prayers to God in the name of Christ. In John xvi. 23, our Saviour says, ' Verily, verily, I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you. Hitherto have
ye asked nothing in my name ; ask, and yo shall receivo, that your joy may be full :' And again : • At that day ye shall ask in my name :' and in John xiv. 13, 14. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.' See also John xv. 16. St. Paul also (Colossians jïi. 17,) • And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the pame of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. The direction given to us, to offer up our prayers and thanksgivings in the name of Christ; and the promise, that in this case, and in this only, we shall be heard ; teaches us in the strongest manner, that our prayers are acceptable to God for his sake, and not our own; and that in offering them we are to rely wholly for acceptance, and for blessings of every kind, on what he has done, and not on what we have ourselves done. Of course, the audience and acceptance which are granted, and the blessings which are given to us, are granted and given for the sake of Christ, and not for our own sakes. But no reason can be alleged, why blessings should be given to us for the sake of Christ, unless he has interfered in some manner or other in our behalf, and done something for us, which has made it pleasing and proper in the sight of God to give us blessings on this account, which otherwise he would not have thought it proper to give. If God will not give us blessings on our own account, it is undoubtedly because we have done something which renders it improper for him thus to give them. Otherwise, the same benevolence which feeds the ‘sparrow' and the raven,' would certainly be ready to bless us. We, therefore, by our sins have forfeited our title to all blessings, and even to the privilege of asking for them. If God will give us blessings on account of Christ, it is certain that Christ has done something for us which has removed this impropriety, and which God accepts on our behalf, notwithstanding the forfeiture. In other words, he has made it consistent with the honour of the divine character and government, that the benevolence which we had forfeited, should be renewedly exercised towards us.
5. I argue the same doctrine from the sacrifices under the law of Moses.
St. Paul tells us, that the ancient ' tabernacle was a figure for the time present.' In the service performed in it, victims were continually offered, under the name of sin-offerings ;' and by them an atonement was made for the sins and for the souis of the people. On this subject, the passages which declare the doctrine here specified, are found almost everywhere in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, and cannot need to be repeated at this time. But we know from the same apostle, that it is not possible for the blood of bulls and of goats to take away sin.' Yet this blood is said, in thirty or forty passages, to be the means of making an ‘atonement' for those who offered it. In what manner was this true ? St. Paul bimself has taught us that it was true in the typical, or figurative, sense only. All these sacrifices, as he has taught us expressly in the 9th and 10th chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews, were only types of the sacrifice of Christ; and the atonement professedly made by them, was only a type of the real atonement made by him. Particularly, the ceremonial of the sacrifice on the great day of expiation, when the high priest made an atonement for himself, his family, the priests, and the whole congregation of Israel, was a remarkable and most lively type of the death and resurrection of Christ. On this day, the tenth day of the seventh month annually, two goats were selected for an offering to God. One of these was killed, and his blood sprinkled upon the mercy-seat, and bcfore the mercy-seat, and upon the horns of the altar. This was called making an atonement for the holy place, and reconciling the holy place, the tabernacle, and the altar unto God, as having been polluted during the preceding year, by the imperfect and impure services of sinful beings. On the head of the living goat the high priest laid both his hands, and confessed over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel ; and sent him away by a fit man into the wilderness.' Of this goat it was said, that · he should bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited.' This religious service cannot, I think, need any explanation.
I shall now proceed to consider,
IV. The manner in which the atonement was performed. On this subject I observe,
1. That, in my own view, all the sufferings of Christ were included in the atunement which he made for sin.
Christ was perfectly holy. No part of his sufferings, th
fore, can have been inflicted or undergone for his own sake. He was always beloved' of God; and whatever he thought, spoke, or did, was ever' well-pleasing' in his sight. When, therefore, we are told, that it pleased Jehovah to bruise him,' it was not as a punishment; for ho never merited punishment: not a wanton, causeless infliction ; for God cannot be the author of such an infliction. It was only as a substitute for mankind that he was afflicted in any case, or in any degree; or because he had • laid on him the iniquities of us all. I understand all such general expressions as these, Ought not Christ to have suffered?'—' it behoved Christ to suffer'• Christ must needs have suffered'-Christ suffered for us' —who being rich, became poor, that ye through him might become rich'-as directly indicating, that all his sufferings were parts of his atonement.
2. The death of Christ, together with its preceding and attendant agonies, especially constituted his atonement.
This'must, I think, have been already made evident from many passages quoted under the third head of discourse, as proofs of the existence of an atonement for sin. I shall, however, add to these several others, which must, it would seem, place the point now in question beyond a doubt.
In the text it is said, that. Christ is set forth as a propitiation, through faith in his blood. But if the blood of Christ was not the means of his becoming a propitiation, it is difficult to conceive in what sense his blood can be the object of our faith, any more than the blood of Jeremiah, Peter, Paul, or any other martyr to the truth of God. But if we walk in the light,' says St. John, the blood of his Son Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin. Ephesians i. 7, In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins ; according to the riches, of his grace.' Ephesians ii. 13, ' But now in Christ Jesus, ye who sometimes were afar off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ.' 1 Peter i. 18, 19, “Ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish, and without spot.' Rev. i. 5, · Who washed us from our sins in his blood.' Rev. v. 9, • Thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood. Rom. v. 9, · Being justified by his blood. In these passages it is directly asserted, that mankind are washed, cleansed, justified, forgiven, 'redeemed, and made nigh unto God, by the blood of