THE

D 0 C T R IN E

OF

THE ATONEMENT;

WITH

STRICTURES ON THE RECENT PUBLICATIONS

OF

DRS WARDLAW AND JENKYN.

To THIS EDITION IS ADDED

AN APPENDIX,

CONTAINING

A REPLY TO DR PAYNE'S ARGUMENTS

ON THE SUBJECT.

By J. A. HALDANE.

SECOND EDITION.

EDINBURGH : WILLIAM WHYTE & CO.

B00KSELLERS TO THE QUEEN DOWAGER,

LONDON : HAMILTON, ADAMS, & CO., GLASGOW, W. COLLINS,

AND D BRYCE; ABERDEEN : J. MACDONALD;

DUBLIN : W. CURRY & CO., AND W. CARSON .

847.

Table of Contents

CHAPTER I.

Pernicious Consequences of Blending Metaphysics with Scripture Truth in the Investigation of the Doctrine of Christ.

CHAPTER II.

Danger of Attempting to Remove the Offence of the Cross.

CHAPTER III.

Redemption.

CHAPTER IV.

General Observations on the Atonement.

CHAPTER V.

On the Unity of Christ and His People.

CHAPTER VI.

The Nature of The Atonement.

CHAPTER VII.

Extent of the Atonement.

CHAPTER VIII.

Effects of the Atonement.

CHAPTER IX.

The Manifestation of Divine Justice and Truth in the Atonement.

CHAPTER X.

Impropriety of Confounding the Death Threatened for Disobedience, with the Sentence of Fallen Man’s Returning to the Dust.

CHAPTER XI.

Universal Atonement Inconsistent with the First Intimation of Mercy, and with God’s Dealings with Mankind, Both Before and Since the Appearance of Christ.

CHAPTER XII.

The Perfect Consistency of the General Invitations of the Gospel with the Doctrine of the Atonement Having Been Offered Only for the Church.

CHAPTER XIII.

On the Sufficiency of the Sacrifice of Christ for all Mankind.

CHAPTER XIV.

Inconsistency of Universal Atonement with the Doctrine of the Substitution and Suretiship of Christ.

CHAPTER XV.

God’s Love to all Mankind.

CHAPTER XVI.

Examination of John iii. 16, 17.

CHAPTER XVII.

The Bearing of the New System on the Doctrine of Justification by Faith.

CHAPTER XVIII.

Observations on Divine Influence, and Upon Natural and Moral Inability.

CHAPTER XIX.

Dr Wardlaw’s Observations on Justice, Considered.

CHAPTER XX.

Remarks on Some Passages of Dr Jenkyn’s Work.

CHAPTER XXI.

The Application of the Expressions of God’s Love for Israel to Mankind in General, One Source of the Error of Universal Atonement.

CHAPTER XXII.

Passages of the Word of God Which Assert the Limitation of Redemption to the Sheep of Christ.

CHAPTER XXIII.

General Expressions Upon Which the Doctrine of Unlimited Atonement is Founded.

CHAPTER XXIV.

The Effects of the Doctrine of Universal Atonement Illustrated by the Sentiments Which Appear to be Becoming Prevalent in Scotland.

CONCLUSION.

APPENDIX.

Reply to Dr Payne's Arguments

PREFACE.

Scotland was peculiarly favoured at the time of the Reformation, not only in many faithful and able men being raised up, but in the peculiar circumstances of the country, which tended to the advancement of truth, and led to a wider separation from the Church of Rome.

No Established Church was probably ever so efficient in promoting the progress of religious knowledge, and in no country of the same extent were just and accurate views of the great doctrines of the Gospel so widely diffused. This was occasioned, under God, not merely by the standards of the Church being very scriptural, but from the institution of parochial schools; which may be considered as a component part of the Church of Scotland.

The country was nearly unanimous in its attachment to the Church; almost the only dissenters were the Episcopalians; and although in no country is religious liberty more fully enjoyed than in Scotland, toleration by law is exclusively granted to that body.

Almost from the commencement of the Church of Scotland, there had been a struggle in regard to the appointment of ministers to vacant charges; and under the plea that disturbances frequently arose on such occasions, in the reign of Queen Anne, the patronage of the different parishes was divided between the Crown and the landholders; while it was understood that at least a certain proportion of the congregation should give their consent to the admission of the presentee.

The exercise of patronage gradually introduced a different class of Preachers into the Church, and while many adhered to the doctrine taught in the standards, others widely deviated in their preaching from what they had subscribed as the confession of their faith. Hence arose the distinction between the Evangelical and Moderate parties, which were constantly brought into collision in the church courts. The former who were most popular, looked with an evil eye upon patronage, and did all in their power to support the people in their attempts to prevent the settlement of Moderates.

For a time, the Evangelical or orthodox party possessed the ascendancy; but through political and personal influence, the number of the Moderates increased considerably, and feeling that they did not possess the sympathy of the people, they exerted themselves to increase the power of their party, by admitting, under the shelter of patronage, men like-minded with themselves, in opposition to the wishes of the people.

This gave rise to the Secession. At first only four ministers left the Church, but they were joined by others; and the United Synod remain a numerous and respectable body. The Seceders retained the standards of the Church of Scotland, and probably it was in some measure owing to them, that these standards continued to possess so much authority throughout the country. Meantime, the Moderate party in the Church had greatly increased, and had by means of the lay elders, obtained a majority in the General Assembly. They also became more bold in preaching a doctrine very opposite to the standards of the Church.

Other bodies of dissenters had arisen, but they almost universally held the views of doctrine contained in the Confession of Faith. In the Church itself, the Moderate party began to lose ground; a much greater proportion of the ministers avowed their attachment to the doctrine taught in the standards; and the preponderance of the Evangelical party in the Assembly, was secured by the admission of the ministers of Chapels of Ease, to vote in the church courts. This led to the recent separation of those who have taken the name of the “Free Church of Scotland.”

Previously to this, the attention of the Secession Synod, was directed to the doctrine preached by some of their number. The discussions upon this subject, proved that differences subsisted in the body, which had not been previously brought forward. The Confession of Faith distinctly limits the Atonement to the Church which Christ loved, and for which he gave himself; but it appeared that some of the United Synod maintained the universality of the Atonement.

This sentiment has also become widely diffused among Independents, and has given rise to a separation of some churches from that body, not from disapprobation of universal Atonement, but from their having followed it out to its natural consequences, —the exclusion of the doctrine of personal election, and the necessity of the work of the Spirit.

It may at first sight appear improbable, but there seems to have been a connexion between missionary exertions for evangelizing the world, and a greater indifference in regard to the maintenance of sound doctrine. Till within the last fifty years, few attempts were made to diffuse the Gospel among the nations. Contented with the enjoyment of their own privileges, believers did not feel the obligation under which they were laid to disseminate the knowledge of the truth. Their attention was confined to the state of religion at home, and those who felt the importance of contending earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints, exerted themselves to preserve the Gospel in its purity and simplicity at home. In this field, the zeal of the most devoted servants of Christ was employed; but no sooner was a commencement made in the missionary field, than the importance of the object commended itself to believers. Societies were formed, not only for the propagation of the Gospel abroad, but also for its wider diffusion at home. Thus a field was opened for activity, of which many availed themselves who had formerly been satisfied with attending to their own religions concerns, and those of their immediate friends.

In this world everything is mixed and alloyed; the best schemes are attended with some drawbacks. While the new born zeal for the propagation of the Gospel had the happy effect of promoting union among believers, who had hitherto been separated by their differences in regard to church order, it led many to undervalue the importance of those differences respecting the doctrine of Christ, which had hitherto occupied their attention.

“Life and death,” says the Scripture, “are in the power of the tongue, and they that love it, shall eat the fruit thereof.” The condemnation of bigotry, and the praise of liberality which echoed from every platform, powerfully operated, both on the speakers and hearers, and while union was promoted, it was not unfrequently at the expense of zeal for the truth.

In addition to this, a class of persons were brought into connexion with believers who were very estimable members of society, and were desirous of promoting the happiness of their fellowmen, while they had paid but little attention to religion, and had been so much occupied with worldly business, that they entertained very inaccurate views of doctrine, and consequently undervalued as mere “speculative knowledge,” an intimate acquaintance with those great truths in which the character of the God with whom we have to do is developed. The formation of Bible Societies, operated still more powerfully in the same direction. The desire of disseminating the Scriptures was the sole object; and all minor differences, as they were termed, were kept out of sight.

The consequence was, that a “mixed multitude” united with believers in their exertions for the diffusion of the Gospel of Christ, and like those who followed Israel out of Egypt, they exercised an unfavourable influence, and rendered the people of God less anxious than formerly about the accuracy of their views of Gospel truth.

But this was not all; many were sanguine in regard to the universal diffusion of the Gospel in the world. In a late very popular publication, it is stated, that had the Church done its duty, the world would ere now have been evangelized. It is not easy to guess what precise idea should be affixed to the term. If it imply, that all mankind would have been brought within the bond of the new covenant, it gives a very false view of the Divine procedure, as if it were possible that any should be lost of those who were chosen in Christ, and given him to be redeemed from among men. If, on the other hand, it imply, that the world would by this time have become nominal Christians, like the generality of the inhabitants of this and other Christian nations, it may safely be said, that the Church has never possessed the means of accomplishing the task.

From not attending to the doctrine of Scripture, many erroneously supposed that the universal proclamation of the Gospel, implied Universal Atonement; for how, as Dr Wardlaw asks, could pardon of unatoned sin be preached? so that the more zealous such men became in the cause of missions, the more were they confirmed in this unscriptural doctrine. This notion, however erroneous, appears to have great weight with many; so that in a variety of ways, the unscriptural doctrine of Unlimited Atonement has received support from missionary exertions.

The object of the following pages, is to vindicate the doctrine of PARTICULAR REDEMPTION; to show that Christ purchased the Church with his own blood, and has thereby secured eternal life to all his sheep, whom he separates from the goats by means of the Gospel, which is represented as the rod of his power.

Dr Wardlaw having taken a prominent part in defending the doctrine of Universal Atonement, his principal arguments, in his “Discourses on the Nature and Extent of the Atonement of Christ,” are particularly considered, and the inevitable consequences of the new system are illustrated by what has already taken place, in the denial of election, and of the necessity of the work of the Spirit to produce saving faith.

Dr Wardlaw’s publication is characterized by a very able reviewer, as containing doctrinal views, which “involve in their nature and tendency, a surrender into the hands of the enemy of not an immaterial or unimportant position merely, but the very fortress of the Gospel.”[*] Dr Wardlaw has replied, but by no means in a satisfactory manner. He employs the words, “imputation,” “substitution,” and “expiation,” but attaches to them a different meaning from that which they hear in the word of God. His argument, in regard to the mode of the Divine government, is worthy of particular attention. He maintains that it is not conducted on the principle of “distributive,” or “retributive,” but of “public justice,” which is only the shadow of justice without the substance, the appearance without the reality.

Some observations are also made upon Dr Jenkyn’s work, which has been widely circulated in England.

The Atonement is the foundation of the Gospel; it is the root from which all its ramifications spring, and upon the correctness of our views on this subject, depend, under God, our true or false apprehensions of every part of the revelation of mercy.

Should the following pages be made useful in preventing any of the children of God from being carried along with the current, which appears to have set in with such force in this country, and which threatens to sweep away the ancient landmarks; or should they be instrumental in recovering any who have fallen into error, the Author’s object will be attained. Amidst the false doctrines which are so prevalent, we may rejoice in the assured confidence, that He who is Head over all things to the Church, is conducting the affairs of his kingdom to that consummation which shall at once most illustriously display his own and his Father’s glory, and shall most effectually tend to the advancement of the happiness of his redeemed people.

PREFACE

To the Second Edition.

There is no danger of the interests of religion suffering by discussion. It may indeed be conducted in an improper spirit, and much sin may be committed while we are attempting to vindicate the truth; but this is the abuse of the apostolic precept, that we should earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints. Amidst the unmeaning declamation against religious controversy, it is well to remember, that the Gospel is the revelation of the character of God, and consequently in so far as we take a false view of any part of the truth, we must, to the same extent, err in regard to our apprehensions of Him whom we profess to worship.

This holds more especially in regard to the doctrine of the Atonement. The question respecting its nature and extent, involves the fundamental inquiries:—Whether the incarnation, sufferings, and death, of the Son of God, resulted from the perfection of the Divine character, which rendered it imperative, if mercy were shown to the guilty, that the claims of justice should be fully satisfied?—Whether in the plan of salvation, the law has been magnified and made honourable, not a jot or tittle passing from it till all was fulfilled?—Whether, while transgressors are pardoned, sin has been more signally punished, than if the whole human race had perished? or—Whether the plan of redemption, into which the angels desire to look, was designed merely to vindicate the government of God in the eyes of his creatures, and to prevent its falling into contempt? in short—Whether the Atonement was really an expiation of sin, or a spectacle for the purpose of producing an impression upon the subjects of the Divine government?

In opposition to the numerous and explicit declarations of the Word of God, in which the sins of his people are represented as being made to meet upon Christ, that they might be invested with his perfect righteousness; according to the new system, although treated as righteous, yet they can never cease to be guilty; while there was no transference of guilt to their glorious Head and Surety, whose sufferings and death were consequently a merely gratuitous intimation of what their sins had merited.

In the introduction of the new theory of Atonement into Scotland, we have a striking example of error being privily brought in. Just views of the subject were almost universal among the disciples of Christ; but the leaven now so widely diffused was silently introduced. Being fostered by some whose character for Christian knowledge and experience stood high in public estimation, it wrought gradually and almost imperceptibly, till it attained its present magnitude, and has spread very widely in many denominations; thus removing one of the most powerful barriers against the introduction of Popery, which threatens once more to overspread the land.

Not long after my having been informed that a second edition of this Work was required, I heard of Dr Payne’s Strictures on what I had published. In an Appendix, his statements are examined. According to his system, the sacrifice of Christ bore no nearer relation to those who are saved than to those who are lost. The subject is most important; it is not a dispute about words; it involves the very essence of gospel truth. On the decision of the question rests the momentous inquiry, —Is the Divine justice a reality or merely a name, a substance or only a shadow?

Edinburgh, February 1847.

CHAPTER I.

Pernicious Consequences of Blending Metaphysics with Scripture Truth in the Investigation of the Doctrine of Christ.

THE ATONEMENT is the most important subject which can engage the thoughts of men or of angels. It not only involves the eternal destinies of an innumerable multitude of the human race, but gives to the universe the fullest view of the perfections of the great Creator. In it are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge; it exhibits the unsearchable riches of Christ; and, by the Church purchased with his blood, is made known to the principalities and powers in heavenly places, the manifold wisdom of God. The Atonement made by the Son of God, is the beginning of the ransomed sinner’s hope, and will be the theme of his exultation, when he shall cast his crown before the throne, and sing the song of Moses and of the Lamb.

If such be the importance of this doctrine, of what moment must it be to understand it aright? But how is fallen man to apprehend those truths to which his heart is so much opposed? All the force of human intellect is feebleness, when it attempts, in its own strength, to comprehend the things which pertain to the kingdom of God. This is a fundamental truth which we are ever prone to forget; and, as a preliminary to the consideration of the Atonement, it may be well for a moment to contemplate the weakness of unaided reason, and its inability to unveil the mysteries of the gospel of Christ.

The grand distinction between the knowledge of Christ and every other science, consists in this, —that no strength of natural abilities, no acuteness of perception, no reach of genius, is sufficient to dissipate the cloud which sin has interposed between God and every child of Adam. And what renders the case still more awful, fallen man is unconscious of the darkness of his understanding. Though blind, he says, “I see and, like Samson shorn of his locks, yet still confiding in his strength, he knows not that the Lord has departed from him. It is this presumptuous confidence in their own wisdom, this pride of intellect, this ignorance of their own blindness, which enables Satan to lead men captive at his will, and to prevent the light of the glorious gospel from shining into their hearts. But not only are thousands thus conducted to perdition; even those who in some measure know the truth, and have, at least in part, renounced their own wisdom, too often forget the first lesson they have learned, and resort to the metaphysics of the schools, and to the deductions of fallible reason, for the elucidation of the truth as it is in Jesus.

This has proved a fruitful source of error among believers in all ages, and yet the voice of inspiration in almost every page of Scripture, exposes the presumption of subjecting the things of God to the test of this world’s wisdom. The doctrine of Christ was intended to stain the pride of man, and to bring down his high imaginations. He fell by pride, by coveting a greater measure of knowledge than God had seen fit to bestow; and he is restored by ceasing from his own wisdom, and receiving the kingdom of God as a little child. When the Lord appeared, he did not resort to the schools of the learned, or select his disciples from among the rulers or scribes of Israel: he chose his first missionaries from among the poor and uneducated, not that he might pour contempt on human learning, when confined to its proper sphere, but to teach us that the excellency of the power by which sinners are converted is of God, that no flesh might glory in His presence. When the Seventy returned with a report of their success, Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes; even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight.”[†]

To the same purpose, the apostle Paul speaks throughout his epistles; it was his boast that he counted all his worldly attainments loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ. His language in regard to human endowments and human acquirements, is very different from the “great swelling words of vanity,” by which many writers on religion strive to set forth in a philosophic form, new views of the gospel of Christ. He tells us, he was sent to preach the gospel, “not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.” He informs the disciples in Corinth, —at that period the most polished city of Greece, —that he came to them, “not with excellency of speech, or of wisdom, declaring the testimony of God;” that his confidence of success did not rest on the learning which he had acquired at the feet of Gamaliel, but in his determination not to know anything among them “but Jesus Christ and him crucified.” He declares that his speech and his preaching were “not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power;” and lest these declarations should not be sufficient, he adds, “It is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent;” and inquires, “ Where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? for after that in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching, to save them that believe.” And, finally, he declares that “God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things that are mighty; and base things of the world, and things that are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things that are not, to bring to nought things that are, that no flesh should glory in his presence.”

To those who are “wise in their own conceit,” these are hard sayings; and they are ready to exclaim, Who can hear them? Are the noblest endowments of man, his various faculties, the acquirements of laborious study, the accumulated learning of the schools, to be trampled underfoot? Does Christianity disparage science, and put a stop to philosophical inquiry? If such were its tendency, it would indeed be calculated—as a Socinian writer, in opposing the Gospel, has alleged—to lead us back to the barbarism of the dark ages. But while Christianity does not repress the exercise of the human intellect, when labouring in its own territory, it warns us against tampering with the revelation of God; it informs us that to be wise unto salvation, we must become fools. It keeps everything in its proper place; it draws a broad line of demarcation between natural and spiritual things, and characterizes as “science falsely so called,” every attempt to illustrate and explain by our vain reasonings, those things which are revealed to faith, and are therefore to be received on the authority of God. By the very process which the Apostle so pointedly condemns, men at first lost the knowledge of God. “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things;” and, as the righteous punishment of their rebellion, they were given up to the commission of every abomination.

It is against what the Apostle terms the “vain babblings” of philosophy, that inspiration points its artillery. The wise of this world are condemned in Scripture, not because they are engaged in the pursuit of science, but because, under the mask of philosophy, they reject the knowledge of God, and, filled with the pride of their own attainments, refuse to hearken to the truth as it is in Jesus. It was the testimony of the wisest of men, under the guidance of inspiration, that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, and to the same purpose the Apostle—after exposing the unsatisfactory result of all the wisdom of this world—proceeds, “Howbeit, we speak wisdom among them that are perfect, yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, which cometh to nought, but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world to our glory.”

True philosophy consists in our sitting at the feet of Jesus, and receiving the truth as He has been pleased to reveal it. The Scriptures teach us, that the understanding of fallen man is darkened, and that the Holy Spirit alone can illuminate its inmost recesses with the light of truth. Is it not, then, the height of folly to expect to attain the knowledge of the truth, except by the Spirit taking of the things of Christ, and showing them to us? But many who admit this truth, are prone to blend the doctrine of the Bible and the systems of philosophy. This is a fruitful source of heresy and error; and hence the earnestness with which Paul warned his son Timothy, to shun what he terms “profane and vain babblings;” hence, too, the solemn denunciations of the Apostle John against those who perverted the gospel. And were it not that human nature is ever the same, that fallen man is alienated from the life of God, through the darkness and ignorance that is in him, it would be passing strange that, notwithstanding all these warnings, in spite of all the experience of ages, and of the lessons to be learned from the history of the apostolic churches, good men are still found affecting the wisdom, and courting the reputation of philosophers, thus seeking to shun the reproach of the cross, by accommodating their doctrine to the prejudices of a world in rebellion against God.

These remarks have been suggested by the consideration of the various schemes by which men have attempted to bring the doctrine of the Atonement into harmony with their own conceptions. Instead of being guided by the plain declarations of the word of God, many are not afraid to try the Divine proceedings by the standard of their perverted judgement, receiving, rejecting, bending, and modifying the truth according to their own vain imaginations.

The Socinian boldly rejects the Atonement, as subversive of his notions of the Divine character. The Arminian explains away the doctrine, so as to render it as much a propitiation for the lost as for the saved. While, in our own day, another class of theologians have arisen, who attempt to obviate the objections made against the Atonement, as exhibited in the word of God, by representing it merely as a public display of God’s disapprobation of sin, and consequently indefinite, or universal, with reference to its objects.

Against the Socinian view of the Atonement, it will be unnecessary to say anything, further than that between it and the new system, all must perceive a strong family likeness. Both coincide in setting aside the essential attribute of Divine justice. The difference consists in the one making a show of what has in reality no existence; while the other considers the doctrine Atonement derogatory to the Divine benevolence. The Arminian scheme has been often discussed, and refuted by men, the memory of whose useful labours, still lives in all the Churches. The third scheme is a modification of Arminianism, containing, in some respects, a greater portion of truth, which renders it better calculated to mislead and to perplex. It has been well said, that, “parts and parcels of truth are among the most envenomed shafts that fly from the bow of Satan.”

The question at issue is of great importance; it extends farther, and cuts deeper, than may at first appear. It professes to obviate prejudices against the Gospel, and is defended by men who seem to desire to uphold the truth as it is in Jesus, while in reality it leads to consequences from which they would shrink. In attempting to remove the offence of the cross, the Gospel is in fact betrayed; for if the Atonement be indefinite, it is in itself a nullity, and no supplementary act of sovereign grace can clothe it with an importance which it does not really possess. If it be only a display—a vindication of “public justice,”—if, as one of its advocates affirms, “a guilty creature can never become an innocent creature,” then our faith is vain; we are yet in our sins, and are necessarily excluded from that place into which no guilt or impurity can possibly enter. We may never cease to exist, but it is impossible we should enjoy that life which consists in the favour of God; for He is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, and cannot look upon sin. To suppose God wiping away all tears from the eyes of a guilty creature, is absurd and contradictory; for guilt and misery are inseparable. Perfect happiness can only be enjoyed by our being perfectly conformed to God, and this can never take place while there is about us a particle of guilt.

If the Atonement be a fiction, and not a reality, —if it be no more than an exhibition of displeasure against sin, then may we exclaim with the Apostle, “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” But we cannot unite in his triumphant response, when, in the contemplation of the Atonement as an actual satisfaction for, and expiation of, his guilt, he replies, “I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord,” and proceeds, “there is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus;” and, viewing Christ as the Head of his body the Church, and the perfection of that righteousness with which, through union with Him, believers are invested, he boldly demands, “Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.”

We shall conclude this chapter with two extracts from Mosheim’s Ecclesiastical History,—a writer whom none will suspect of a disposition to undervalue learning and philosophical investigation; but he clearly perceived how the gospel, which had at first been corrupted by the Judaizers, was afterwards vitiated by attempts to harmonize it with the idle speculations of those who sought distinction, by striking out something original, and attempting to ingraft their crude notions on the stock of revealed truth.

“Among other accessions to the splendour and force of the growing Church, we may reckon the learned and ingenious labours of those philosophers and literati who were converted to Christianity in this century. I am sensible that the advantages arising from hence to the cause of true religion will be disputed by many; and, indeed, when the question is thus proposed, Whether, upon the whole, the interests of Christianity have gained or lost by the writings of the learned, and the speculations of philosophers, that have been employed in its defence? I confess myself incapable of solving it in a satisfactory manner. For nothing is more manifest than this truth, that the noble simplicity and dignity of religion were sadly corrupted in many places, when the philosophers blended their opinions with its pure doctrines, and were audacious enough to submit that Divine system of faith and piety to be scrutinized and modified by the fallible rule of imperfect reason.”[‡] Again, —

“This venerable simplicity was not indeed of a long duration; its beauty was gradually effaced by the laborious efforts of human learning, and the dark subtilties of imaginary science. Acute researches were employed upon several religious subjects, concerning which ingenious decisions were pronounced, and, what was worst of all, several tenets of a chimerical philosophy were imprudently incorporated into the Christian system. This disadvantageous change, — this unhappy alteration of the primitive simplicity of the Christian religion, was chiefly owing to two reasons; the one drawn from pride, and the other from a sort of necessity. The former was the eagerness of certain learned men to bring about a union between the doctrines of Christianity and the opinions of the philosophers; for they thought it a very fine accomplishment, to be able to express the precepts of Christ in the language of philosophers, civilians, and rabbins. The other reason that contributed to alter the simplicity of the Christian religion, was, the necessity of having recourse to logical definitions and nice distinctions, in order to confound the sophistical arguments which the infidel and the heretic employed; the one to overturn the Christian system, and the other to corrupt it.”[§]

CHAPTER II.

Danger of Attempting to Remove the Offence of the Cross.

THE satisfaction made by the Son of God for his people is the grand peculiarity, —the sum and substance of the Gospel. Here we behold mercy and truth meeting together, righteousness and peace embracing each other. We see “the Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth; keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity, transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty.” But “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God;” and therefore this doctrine has in all ages been gainsaid and perverted. To the Jew, elated with the notion of Messiah adorned with worldly pomp, and wielding an earthly sceptre, the idea of Christ crucified was a stumbling-block. To the philosopher of Greece, a doctrine so humiliating appeared like the ravings of insanity; and in every succeeding age, the truth, which in the days of the Apostles provoked the scorn of the Jew and the contempt of the Greek, has awakened kindred emotions in every unregenerate heart.

Those to whom “it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven,” should look with pity on the opposition of the ungodly. It is a small matter to be reputed fools by those who despise the wisdom of God. In that day, when the heavens and the earth shall flee away from the face of the Judge of the quick and the dead, the Atonement will not only prove the rock of the salvation of believers, but will also appear in the eyes of an assembled universe to have been the power and the wisdom of God. There will then be nothing to blind men's judgement; the allurements of sin will have lost their power; the approbation of our fellow-creatures will have ceased to be an object of the slightest importance. All will be fully occupied with their own concerns; each individual of an assembled world will find himself alone with God. The thoughts of Satan himself will be concentrated upon the hopeless misery in which all his wiles have issued, and neither he nor any of the countless multitude whom he has deluded, will have the melancholy satisfaction of thinking that they have been hardly dealt with.

It might have been expected that the disciples of Christ would have been sufficiently guarded against the delusions of science, falsely so called; yet it is a melancholy fact, that many of them, in every age, have vainly endeavoured to remove the offence of the cross. They seem almost ashamed of the simplicity of the gospel, till they have arrayed it in the tawdry garb of philosophy, and brought it into accordance with the wisdom of this world. To remove the offence of the cross, is an attempt as hopeless as to create a new world; we may reject the Gospel altogether, but, without being utterly corrupted, it cannot be blended with men’s preconceived notions. The offence of the cross is the fruit of that darkness in which man was involved, when, refusing to be guided by the wisdom of God, he presumed to cast off his allegiance to his Maker; and nothing but the power which caused the light to shine out of darkness, can give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God, as it shines in the face of Jesus Christ. But while it is vain to endeavour, by carnal weapons, to effect what the Holy Spirit alone can accomplish, it is possible to mutilate the truth as it is in Jesus, so as to neutralize its power while striving to render it more palatable. This is the great danger to which the truth has in every age been exposed. To this the Apostle referred, when he so earnestly besought the Colossians to beware lest any man should spoil them through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. He entertained no apprehensions for the Gospel, —the word of the Lord endureth for ever; —but he feared that the Colossians might be removed from that steadfastness in Christ, —from that simple reliance on his Atonement, which was essential to the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ.

There is another temptation of a kindred description, by which many have been seduced into error, while philosophising on the Gospel. It is an error akin to that of Uzzah, who put forth his hand to support the ark of God when the oxen stumbled. It consists in a desire to vindicate the character of God, and to account for the Divine procedure in the plan of redemption, in a manner satisfactory to our limited reason.

It is very awful to observe how lightly some writers speak of those mysteries into which angels desire to look. “The half learning of modem times,” says a celebrated writer, “has been the fruitful source of many evils;” and, assuredly, it is not the least of these evils, that so many seem disposed to acquire literary fame, by publishing something new on the doctrines of the Gospel. Such writers are naturally led to attempt to discover a method by which they may soften down what may be deemed the hard features of Christianity, by some theory which shall exhibit the Gospel in a more popular garb, and by which the Divine character may be brought into closer accordance with men’s preconceived opinions.

This mode of procedure is, to say the least of it, very opposite to the spirit and example of the Word of God. We are there taught that He giveth no account of His matters, — that it is his glory “to conceal a thing.” We are told that before Him all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; that He doth according to His will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth; that none can stay His hand, or say unto Him, What doest thou?

Those writers who, to please philosophers, or to advance their reputation, in a great measure discard the Bible, and discuss the character and conduct of Jehovah on abstract principles;—those who seem to think it a fair subject of debate, whether God’s dealings with his creatures, as exhibited in the Scriptures, are becoming and right, —do in effect, if not intentionally, presumptuously summon their Creator to the bar of their puny judgement, —call upon the Almighty to give an account of his matters,—and, in reality, although not in words, say unto God, “What doest thou?”

How different is the lesson taught us in Scripture! When the Lord spoke to Job out of the whirlwind, He did not condescend to vindicate the rectitude of his moral government, which Job had presumed to impugn. He exhibited himself as the Almighty, as the Creator and Upholder of all things. And the Apostle’s reasoning is precisely similar, when he inquires, “Nay, but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus?” It would be well for writers such as those to whom we have referred, to remember, that fallen man can only escape the wrath to come, by his high imaginations being cast down. Instead of answering the question, —How can these things be? God tells us, so they are. But men are prone to exercise themselves in things too high for them, and in attempting to go beyond what is written, and to overleap the bounds of revealed truth, they bewilder themselves in the endless mazes of their own imaginations. We are ever apt to forget that the things of the Spirit of God are foolishness to the natural man. We endeavour to amplify them, that we may remove the offence of the cross; and the result of our presumption is, —a perversion of the Gospel of Christ.

CHAPTER III.

Redemption.

To REDEEM, means to repurchase, to recover, to ransom. Man was the property of his Creator, who gave him being. He sold himself to Satan; and all mankind are naturally led captive by the devil at his will. But the seed of the woman, —those whom Christ is not ashamed to call brethren, —are ransomed from the cruel bondage in which they were held; while the rest of mankind, —the seed of the serpent, — remain the bond slaves of Satan. Redemption is always limited to the people of God, and is synonymous with salvation. The Church is termed Christ’s purchased possession, Eph. i. 14, for it is purchased with his own blood, Acts xx. 28; its members are redeemed to God by the blood of the Lamb, Rev. v. 9. Election and redemption are evidently of the same extent; they relate to the same individuals, to all such, and to none else. All the chosen people are redeemed, and all the redeemed are chosen unto obedience, through sanctification of the Spirit, and the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ, 1 Pet. i. 2. Again, we read, “According as he hath chosen us in Him, —in whom we have redemption through his blood,” Eph. i. 4, 7.

Redemption is sometimes spoken of as future, because it is not completed till the resurrection, which is called “the redemption of our body,” Rom. viii. 23. “the day of redemption,” Eph. iv. 30. The redeemed are now the sons of God, adopted into his family; while here they are exposed to the same troubles and afflictions as other men, but when Christ, who is their life, shall appear, they shall be like him, having their vile body fashioned like to his glorious body. Hence it is written, “I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes,” Hosea xiii. 14.

The redemption of the Church, the body of Christ, like every other great doctrine of the Gospel, was embodied in the history of Israel. They were redeemed from cruel bondage, from the iron furnace, while the sprinkling of the blood of the paschal lamb preserved them from the awful judgement by which their redemption was effected. Many plagues had been inflicted upon Egypt; and, as God had foretold, they produced no lasting effect upon the haughty mind of Pharaoh. But, previously to the destruction of the first-born, the Lord commanded his people to prepare for their departure, by keeping “the passover.” Had their deliverance been effected without blood, it would not have corresponded with the redemption of the true Israel, who are redeemed with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. “Christ our passover is sacrificed for us.” Believers are described as having “come to the blood of sprinkling, which speaketh better things than the blood of Abel.” The redemption of Israel after the flesh was temporal, that of the true Israel is eternal. Heb. ix. 12.

In the Old Testament, we find nothing like universal redemption; it was limited to God’s chosen people. They were exclusively the redeemed of the Lord, Psal. cvii. 2.; Micah vi. 4; but they were taught to look for a greater redemption by the King Messiah. Hence the disciples, after mentioning the mighty works which Jesus had done, added, “We trusted this had been he who should have redeemed Israel,” Luke xxiv. 21. They knew not, that it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day; but what led them to fear that they had been mistaken, ultimately proved the crowning evidence that Jesus was the Christ.

Had he appeared to accomplish for Israel a temporal deliverance, the mighty works which he performed would have proved that he was equal to the task, and that on him they might confidently rely; but he came to obtain “eternal redemption” for his people, to spoil principalities and powers, and to make a show of them openly, triumphing over them in his cross, Col. ii. 14, 15; this could only be accomplished by death, by making his soul an offering for sin; by ratifying the everlasting covenant, which secures the salvation of God’s elect, with his own blood; by dying, rising, and reviving, that he might be the Lord both of the dead and of the living: and thus making it manifest that he had the keys of hell and death. His people, in common with all mankind, had been doomed to return to the dust. For many generations they had successively disappeared from the earth, and gone down the valley of the shadow of death; but the good Shepherd appeared to bring again that which was driven away, —to bind up that which was broken. He came, by death to destroy him that had the power of death; to break his yoke from off their necks; to deprive death of its sting, and the grave of its victory; so that his people might meet the king of terrors not only with calmness, but with joy, as the termination of all their afflictions.

We have observed, that redemption is synonymous with salvation. Hence Israel, so frequently described as God’s redeemed, are represented as saved, Deut, xxxiii. 29. True, their salvation or redemption was temporal, —a shadow for the time then present, prefiguring the spiritual and eternal redemption or salvation of the true Israel, —the children of God, who are scattered abroad, and whom Jesus came to gather into one, John xi. 52. The means which God employed, were effectual for the redemption of Israel after the flesh, whom alone, under that dispensation, he knew, of all the families of the earth; and the means employed, viz. the incarnation and sufferings of the Son of God, are effectual for the redemption of the true Israel, for all who were given to him of the Father, and with whom he took part in flesh and blood; in regard to all others he will say, Depart from me, “I never knew you.”

While the final and complete separation of the children of God and the children of the devil will not take place till the judgement of the great day, a real separation is produced by the publication of the Gospel. It is to be preached indiscriminately to all who, in the course of Providence, are brought under the joyful sound. Salvation is of faith, and faith cometh by hearing the word of God; whence it follows, that the gospel invitations should be addressed to all to whom we have access. The gospel is the fan by which Christ separates his people from the world; the word of God tries all who hear it: some believe the things which are spoken, and some believe not. The former are delivered from the power of darkness, and translated into the kingdom of God’s dear Son; Christ is formed in them the hope of glory; he takes up his abode in their hearts by faith, and they become the temple[**] of the Holy Ghost, which dwelleth in them, which they have of God, and by which they obey the truth, 1 Pet. i. 22.

Ample instructions are given to preach a free and full salvation to mankind indiscriminately, while redemption is limited to God’s elect, who are described as redeemed or saved, Tit. ii. 14.; iii. 5. Those from whom the Gospel is hid, are irrecoverably lost; while those who, by receiving the record of God concerning his Son, set to their seal that God is true, are saved with an everlasting salvation, —made meet for the inheritance of the saints in light; and thus the effect produced upon men by the Gospel, discovers for whom expiation was made upon the cross, whose sins Christ bore in his own body on the tree, that they, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness.

The gospel tells no man his sins are atoned for, but it tells every man who hears it, that it is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ came into the world to save the chief of sinners; and that by Him all who believe are justified from all things, while the wrath of God abides upon unbelievers.

God provided redemption for men, not for devils; why not then for some men, and not for others? Neither men nor devils had any claim upon God; both were inexcusable, and who shall presume to decide to whom His mercy shall extend? Rom. ix. 15.

“In Scripture, redemption is something substantial and palpable; it is redemption to God—from the earth—from among men—from bondage—from death—from the grave— from the curse of the law—from all iniquity—from our former vain conversation; but universal redemption frees us from nothing; —it leaves us where it found us—it is like an idol—it is nothing in the world—it is another redemption, which is not another, but a perversion of the redemption of Christ—it is a shadow—it has no substance—it is but a name.”

CHAPTER IV.

General Observations on the Atonement.

Amidst the various schemes at present formed to diffuse the knowledge of Christ throughout the world, there appears no small danger of another gospel being substituted instead of that promulgated by the Apostles. The universality of the Atonement has long been held by some classes of professing Christians; but the doctrine that the good Shepherd laid down his life for the sheep, —that He purchased the Church with his own blood, —has generally prevailed in this country since the Reformation. Of late, however, many have embraced the notion that this is a narrow view of the subject, and that the Atonement of Christ was not restricted to the children whom God had given him, to be gathered out of the world; but was made equally for all mankind. This has long been one of the points of controversy between Calvinists and Arminians. But in connexion with the universality of the Atonement, the latter denied personal election; whereas those who have lately embraced the Arminian tenet of universal atonement, maintain that the peculiarity of redemption consists in its application, according to the sovereign pleasure of God; whence it inevitably follows, that men are not saved by the Atonement, but by its application; and, consequently, that the Holy Spirit, and not Christ, is the Saviour.

The new system is not more scriptural, and is less plausible, than Arminianism.[††] If the doctrine of election be admitted, of what difficulty do we get rid, by asserting that Christ died for all? The elect alone obtain salvation, and the rest are blinded. It is said the free and unlimited proclamation of the Gospel to sinners of mankind, is founded on the universality of the Atonement; but such is not the case. Pardon through faith in Jesus, is commanded to be preached to all who, in the providence of God, are brought under the sound of the Gospel, and by their reception of the truth, those whose guilt was expiated on Calvary, are distinguished from those to whom the Lord will say, I never knew you. The Gospel brings the redeemed under the shadow of the wings of the Almighty, while it discovers the utter alienation from God of those who perish, whom Christ never knew.

The difference between those who hold particular redemption, and the advocates of the new system, is highly important. So far from being a strife of words, it involves the very essence of the Gospel. A universal Atonement, by which all are not saved, is no Atonement; and here we have an illustration of the common proverb, that extremes meet. If Atonement were made for all, and yet many perish, none are saved by the Atonement, —they owe their salvation to something else; so that, in point of fact, no Atonement was made, no satisfaction was given, for the sins of any of the children of men.

Atonement means expiation, —satisfaction for sin; and if the satisfaction be sufficient, those for whom it was made, must necessarily receive the benefit. Dr Wardlaw, in commenting upon the Apostle’s words, “But now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himself,” observes, “It is obvious that the putting away of sin, when represented as effected by a sacrifice, must mean the expiation of its guilt, and the consequent prevention of its penal effects. I think, therefore,” he adds, “I shall not be far from the true import of the words, if I consider them as expressing the sentiment that Christ came for the purpose of MAKING, BY THE SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF, AN ATONEMENT FOR SIN.”[‡‡] Can anything be more palpable than that, according to this statement, the sin of those for whom the Atonement was made, was put away, —their guilt was expiated by the sacrifice of Christ, and its penal effects prevented. If Christ made Atonement for sin, and if this Atonement be universal, either all are justified, or the Atonement has proved insufficient. The latter alternative cannot be adopted; for Dr Wardlaw maintains the infinite value of the sacrifice of Christ, so that his system necessarily leads to universal restoration.

Every deviation from the word of God is fraught with danger. Error in religion resembles a wedge, which at first produces no perceptible effect, but which surely, though gradually, rends the substance into which it has been introduced. This is illustrated in the progress of the advocates of universal Atonement. Some have carried out the principle to its legitimate consequences, representing men as possessing ability to repent and turn to God. Others admit that it is only by the power of the Holy Spirit that sinners are brought to the foot of the cross. While a third party adopt a middle course, and by distinctions between natural and moral inability, seem disposed to get rid of the question.

It is the object of these pages to exhibit the Atonement in the light of the word of God, and to consider the principal arguments in favour of a system which virtually sets aside the Atonement altogether, disparages the love of God to his people, and turns away the mind from the simplicity that is in Christ.

It is a very striking feature in the writings of the advocates of the new system, that they are chiefly occupied with metaphysical reasonings. Their appeal is not so much to the word of God, as to our preconceived notions. It is evident how fallacious such a line of argument must prove. The wisdom of God is in diametrical opposition to the wisdom of this world, so that if any man will be wise in this world, he most become a fool, that he may be wise.

All errors respecting the Atonement originate in erroneous views of the state into which man was brought by the fall. It has been alleged that Adam’s posterity partake of the consequences of his sin; but had they not been partakers of his guilt, they could not have been partakers of its effects. It may be laid down as an incontrovertible axiom, that UNDER THE RIGHTEOUS AND PERFECT GOVERNMENT OF GOD, THERE CAN BE NO SUFFERING WHERE THERE IS NO SIN. The imputation of guilt to Adam’s posterity was not an arbitrary act; they were verily guilty, else they would not be “by nature children of wrath and although in Christ there was no sin, yet having condescended to unite himself with his people, to come in the likeness of sinful flesh, and being made under the law as their surety and substitute, he was justly made answerable for them. When the sword awoke against the Man who was the fellow of the Almighty, it was the sword of justice. To the wisdom of the world this is foolishness, but to those who are called, it is the power of God. It is the wisdom of God in a mystery; even the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world for our glory, and which believers are commanded to hold in a pure conscience.

Another incontrovertible axiom is, that NOTHING BUT SIN CAN SEPARATE A CREATURE FROM ITS CREATOR. Guilt alone interposes an impassable gulf between Him who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, and the work of his hands; but it is filled up by the Atonement. God looks upon those in whose behalf it was offered in the face of his Anointed, and sees no iniquity in Jacob, nor perverseness in Israel. So glorious is the Atonement made for them on the cross, so full the satisfaction made to the holy and righteous law, that God remembers their sins no more, —they are fully expiated. Thus are the redeemed, in their successive generations, justified from all things. In their glorious Head, they have endured the penalty of their guilt; they are dead to the law by the body of Christ broken for them; they are therefore no more under the law; the marriage is dissolved by death; they are married to another, and the evidence of the union is their bringing forth fruit unto God. Sin, says the apostle, shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under the law, but under grace. And again, “How shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein.”[§§] While under the law, they were under the curse, Gal. iii. 10; but in Christ they endured the curse, — “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us.” What is the curse? Being forsaken of God. And this extorted from the great Redeemer the loud and bitter cry, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me!” A solemn pause ensued, while darkness enveloped the earth, for it was eminently the hour and power of darkness. At length, having tasted the bitterness of death in the withdrawing of the light of his Father’s countenance, Jesus proclaimed, “It is finished!” The Atonement was complete, the law was magnified and made honourable, and God’s people are “sanctified through the offering of the body of Christ once for all.” In his resurrection they received a full discharge. The handwriting of ordinances which they had violated was forever cancelled and nailed to the cross, and hence there is no condemnation for them; and although they must drink of his cup, —be like Him who was a man of sorrows while in this world, —and be made conformable to his death, they shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection, and have part in that endless life to which he is risen.

Thus was Christ, who knew no sin, made sin for his people, that they might be made the righteousness of God in him. According to some, his being made sin means a sin offering; but his being made sin is opposed to our being made righteousness, which surely does not mean a righteous offering. Should it even be admitted that sin is here to be understood to mean a sin offering, we would ask, Why was the sin offering called sin? Because the sin of the worshipper was figuratively transferred to the victim, which, under this imputation, endured the wages of sin; and thus was Christ stricken for the transgression of God’s people, Is. liii. 3—8. He purchased the Church with his own blood, and in the day of regeneration he takes possession of his purchase, taking up his abode in his people, by his Spirit. Hence the apostle connects the assertion that believers are bought with a price, with their bodies being the temple of the Holy Ghost, 1 Cor. vi. 19, 20.

No doubt, the imputation of Adam’s sin and of Christ’s righteousness is a stumbling-block to many; but when the Gospel comes to us, not in word only but in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance, we receive this part of truth as little children, and only as such can we enter the kingdom of God. Our faith must be regulated not by our preconceived opinions, but by His word who has said, “My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor my ways your ways.”

The doctrine of the imputation of our sins to Christ, and of his righteousness to us, has been objected to, as giving a “commercial” view of the Atonement. This phrase has of late been employed as a bugbear to set aside the doctrine of Scripture on this subject. Doubtless, when we read that believers are “bought with a price,” that the Church was purchased with “the blood of God,” that his people are ransomed from the power of the grave, “commercial language” is employed; but it is the language dictated by the wisdom of God, as being best adapted to convey to us just views of the Atonement. The term redemption is strictly “commercial,” but it is selected by Infinite Wisdom, to communicate to us the grandest view of the Divine character.

No creature could have made an atonement for sin, or have magnified the law either by obedience or suffering. Had a body been prepared for the highest angel, his incarnation must have been an act of obedience to his Creator; and after all his humiliation, and all his sufferings, he would have been an unprofitable servant; he could have done no more than his duty. His righteousness, therefore, could not have extended to another; he could have had no superfluous merit, neither could he have offered himself a voluntary sacrifice; he could not have laid down his life, for no creature has power over his own life. No created being could have endured the curse of the broken law, or have stood as the substitute and surety for another; for every creature must bear his own burden. But the Creator, in whom was life, of whose sovereign will the law is but the expression, appeared in the form of a servant; by his obedience unto death, he magnified and made honourable the law which his people had broken; thus restoring what he took not away. In obedience to his Father’s commandment, he laid down his life, that he might take it again, and rose to the power of an endless life, as the first-born of many brethren, to whom he was in all things conformed.

Such is the foundation which God has laid in Sion for the hope of the guilty. Such is the everlasting righteousness in which Christ’s people shall stand unrebukable. It “differs entirely from the righteousness of men and angels in its AUTHOR; for it is the righteousness not of a creature, but of the Creator. I the Lord have created it. It is a divine and infinitely perfect righteousness, wrought out by Jehovah himself, which, in the salvation of man, preserves all His attributes inviolate. The Father created it through the Son, in the same way as by the Son he created the world.”[***]

The gospel is the revelation of this righteousness; it is to be made known to all nations for the obedience of faith, and all who hear it are invited to receive Jesus as their Almighty Saviour; by him to believe in God as their covenant God and Father, and to behold grace reigning through righteousness unto eternal life. In the sufferings and death of the only begotten Son, we have a more awful proof of the malignity of sin than if the whole human race had perished, while peace is proclaimed to the chief of sinners, and those who believe are invested with a righteousness so glorious, that the eye of Omniscience can perceive in it no flaw.

The original constitution of the human race had reference to the plan of salvation. “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.” The creation is itself a mystery indicative of the plan of redemption; mankind were created not individually, but in Adam. He was constituted the covenant-head and representative of all his children, and in him they all sinned and died. Upon this subject the Scripture is explicit: “By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners; —by the offence of one, judgement came upon all men to condemnation; —by one man’s offence death reigned by one; in Adam all die and it is equally explicit in declaring, that “the grace of God and the gift by grace, which is by one Man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many,” that “by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.” Hence Adam is termed the figure of Him that was to come; and Eve, taken from his side while he was cast into a deep sleep, was the type of the Church, which originated in the death of Christ, Eph. v. 29, 32.

CHAPTER V.

On the Unity of Christ and His People.

THE Atonement is founded upon the unity of Christ and his people, with whom he took part in flesh and blood. All mankind are partakers of flesh and blood, but he only took part with the children whom God had given him. This is evident from the language of the Apostle: “For both he that sanctifieth, and they who are sanctified, are all of one;[†††] for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren; in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.” And again, “I will put my trust in him.” And again, “Behold I and the children which God hath given me. Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that, through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage,” Heb. ii. 11—15. Here the unity of him that sanctifieth, and of them that are sanctified, is expressly declared, in consequence of which Jesus acknowledges them as his brethren, represents himself as leading the praises of his people, and, like them, living a life of faith in his Father while he sojourned in our world. He is represented as having come, that by death he might subvert the kingdom of Satan, and deliver his people from the bondage of the king of terrors. This deliverance is not universal; it is limited to Christ’s brethren, to the children whom Gpd had given him, with whom he took part in flesh and blood; and hence the apostle adds, “For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham,” ver. 16. It is not said he took on him the seed of Adam, the father of mankind; but the seed of Abraham, the father of believers. “Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people,” ver. 17. Christ is here said to be made like unto his brethren, who are previously described as those that are sanctified, —separated from the mass of mankind, who are not of the world, even as he is not of the world, John xvii. 16. So far from having united himself with the whole human race, he will say to many, “I never knew you; depart from me.” Christ made atonement for all whom he knew; hence it is written, “The Lord knoweth them that are his;” “the good shepherd knows his sheep;” “by his knowledge shall my righteous Servant justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities,” Is. liii. 11.

By sin, fallen man was alienated from his Maker; but in Christ all his brethren are reconciled to God. And this reconciliation is exhibited in the wonderful person of Immanuel, in which the divine and human natures are indissolubly united; Jesus is thus perfectly qualified to act as the Mediator between God and man. He is the daysman betwixt them, who can lay his hand upon both. In him the glory of the Divine character is secure, for He is God over all. The interest of His people is not less safe, for He is bone of their bone, and flesh of their flesh.

Adam was given as a covenant to all his posterity, who were entirely dependent upon him; the second Adam, the Head of the new, the spiritual creation, is the Surety of the new covenant, the children of which were the objects of God’s everlasting love, and shall inherit the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world. The Son of God, in whom they were chosen, and to whom they were given, undertook their cause; and from the period of the fall, even before His manifestation, their sins were forgiven, in consideration of the ransom which He had engaged to pay for them, Rom. iii. 25, and which was ever present in the view of the eternal Jehovah.

The error of those who stigmatize the full satisfaction made by the Lord in behalf of His people, as a commercial transaction, arises from not considering the truth so much insisted on in the word of God, of the unity of Christ and His people. The Apostle, after speaking of the various gifts bestowed on believers, proceeds, — “For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ,” 1 Cor. xii. 12. Here we find, so to speak, the unity and plurality of Christ. It is not the Son of God considered individually, who is here spoken of, but Christ, the Head of his body the Church, including all His members.

The Church of Christ is as really one as the human body, Eph. v. 30. When the Church is spoken of as a body, Christ is represented as the head, Eph. iv. 15, 16. In the head, all the senses, —with the exception of feeling, which is spread over the whole body, —are placed; sight, hearing, taste, smelling, so that the body is entirely under the direction of the head. The apostle speaking of himself as a member of Christ, says, “I am crucified with Christ.” As the death of the head is the certain death of the members, so was the death of Christ the death of all his people. They all died in his death, rose in his resurrection, and are made to sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, Eph. ii. 6.

Thus we see that the spiritual creation was prefigured by that which is natural, 1 Cor. xv. 46. Adam was the figure of Him that was to come, Rom. v. 14. Two things are essential to the preservation of our natural life; breath, which God at first breathed into Adam’s nostrils, and which through him is conveyed to all his posterity; and food, by which the body is nourished, and the diminution, which continually takes place, is supplied. In exact correspondence with this, the spiritual life, implanted in the day of regeneration, is maintained, 1st, by the constant supply of the Holy Spirit given to Christ without measure, and conveyed to his people, like the precious oil upon the head of Aaron that went down to the skirts of his garments; and, 2ndly, by the truth, as it is in Jesus, or the doctrine of Christ, which is to the soul what food is to the body. Hence the prophet says, “Thy words were found of me, and I did eat them, and they were the joy and rejoicing of my heart,” Jer. xv. 16; and the Lord declares, “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you,” John vi. 53. Believers are ever prone to let slip the truth; they are compared to leaking vessels, Heb. ii. 1. which can only be kept full by a constant supply.

Had not sin entered into the world, all mankind would have been perfectly united; they would have had one heart and one way; no man would have preferred his own interest to that of his brother; the royal law would have remained inviolate, and man would have loved his neighbour as himself; the human race would have formed a glorious fellowship, of which their father Adam would have been the head, and as there is no schism in the body, there would have been none in the human family. Mankind would have been knit together in love, which the Apostle terms the bond of perfectness, or the perfect bond; but sin broke the brotherly covenant, and men live in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. The state of mankind prevents our entering into the meaning of Christ not being ashamed to call his people brethren. Men being brethren, made of the same blood, is no security for mutual love, because the foundations of the earth are out of course, Ps. lxxxii. 5; the creation is made subject to vanity.

Thus the vessel appeared to be marred in the hand of the potter, but he did not lose the materials, for of the shreds of the broken vessel he formed a new fellowship, as much more glorious than the first, as the Second Man, the Lord from heaven, is more glorious than the first man, who was of the earth earthy.

It is not surprising that the natural creation was blasted, for all flesh is as grass; but it was a type of the spiritual creation, consisting of Christ the Head, and his people, who, although many, form one body; just as the human body is one, composed of many members, all animated by one spirit. Such is the case with the body of Christ; “For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office, so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another,” Rom. xii. 4, 5.[‡‡‡] This is the “fellowship of the mystery,” or the mysterious fellowship, “which from the beginning had been hid in God,” by which it was His eternal purpose to make known unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places, His manifold wisdom, Eph. iii. 9—11. Hence we are taught, that all things, visible and invisible, were made, not only by, but for Christ, Col. i. 16.

This fellowship or society, was first announced as the seed of the woman. The title primarily belongs to Christ, Gal. iv. 4; but all the family in heaven and in earth, are named of him, Eph. iii. 15. In the fulness of time, the Only begotten of the Father, the Head of this glorious fellowship, appeared, and, as the great High Priest of his people, according to the will of God, offered the body which had been prepared for him, “By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all,” Heb. x. 10. By this offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified, Heb. x. 14, who were chosen in him, from the mass of mankind, and whom he sanctified with his own blood, Heb. xiii. 12. Having sat down on the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens, he sent forth the Gospel, the rod of his power, that he might gather into one the children of God, which were scattered abroad. Having redeemed them with his blood, he begets them with the word of truth, and thus are they created anew in him, made partakers of a divine nature, and shall be raised spiritual and incorruptible, in his likeness, to which they are all predestinated to be conformed. This is the completion of the new or spiritual birth, begun in the day of regeneration, when Jesus manifests himself to his people, John xiv. 21. The sinner is then renewed in the spirit of his. mind, and the change is completed at the resurrection of the just.

The fellowship subsisting between Christ and his people, may well be called mysterious, for it cannot be perceived by our senses, nor by our natural faculties;[§§§] it can only be perceived by Divine teaching. The wisdom by which it is discerned, cometh from above, but the fellowship is not on this account the less real; it corresponds with the unity of Christ and his Father. This illustration is very striking: the unity of the Father and Christ is the pattern of the unity of Christ and his people. The Father is not the Son, yet they are one; the Holy Spirit is distinct from both, yet these Three are one, 1 John v, 7. Hence the apostolic blessing, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all Amen,” 2 Cor. xiii. 14. This exactly corresponds with the blessing pronounced by the priest upon Israel: “The Lord bless thee, and keep thee: The Lord make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: The Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace,” Numb. vi. 24—26. Here is a threefold repetition of the name of Jehovah, and this is termed, putting the Lord’s name on his chosen Israel.

Christ is appointed heir of all things. He who is the Head of his body, the Church, is seated at the right hand of God, far above all principality and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but in that which is to come. All things are put under His feet. When the First-begotten was brought into the world, the decree went forth, let all the angels of God worship him; and now they are all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation. Such is the glory of the fellowship of which the Son of God is the Head. It is sometimes represented as a building,[****] composed of living stones, deriving life from the living stone on which it rests. In this glorious temple, the Lord will forever dwell, thus accomplishing His eternal purpose, of giving to the universe the fullest manifestation of His infinite wisdom.

The unity of Christ and his people is much insisted on in the word of God, and we have seen how important it was in the eyes of the Apostles. It is the fruit of Christ’s incarnation, without which He could not by death have destroyed him that had the power of death. He might have continued upon his throne, and destroyed Satan, but in vindication of his truth and justice, He must with him have destroyed the whole race of Adam, both the Serpent and his brood; but, by taking part in flesh and blood with the children whom God had given him, Christ became their near kinsman, obtained the right of redemption, and not only restored them to the favour of God, by delivering them from the curse of the broken law, Gal. iii. 13, but raised them above the angels, and brought them nearest the throne of God.

On the unity of Christ and his people, in their being one, as the husband and the wife, —as the head and members of the natural body, —as the vine and the branches, —nay, as the Father and the Son, is founded the Atonement made for them on the cross. The last of these emblems alone gives a full representation of the unity of Christ and his people. The other emblems are earthly, and give an imperfect view of the subject. The marriage relation is dissolved by death; a member of the body may be amputated; the branch may be severed from the stock; so that nothing in this world can adequately represent this glorious truth. We must have recourse to the union of the Father and the Son, in order to form a just conception of the closeness and perpetuity of the union of Christ and his members. It is true that the union of the Father and the Son passeth knowledge, but it is real, and indissoluble, and such, we are taught, is Christ’s union with His chosen people: “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be one as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one; I in them, and Thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that Thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as Thou hast loved me.” John xvii. 20—23. Upon this glorious truth the Atonement rests.

Some represent the Atonement as an expedient to vindicate public justice, and to maintain the honour of the Divine government in pardoning the guilty; but according to the view which they give of the matter, it is an expedient to dispense with justice; it is the punishment of the innocent, that the guilty may escape. Such things may take place under human governments, but it is impossible under the righteous government of God. Such is its perfection, that under it NO INNOCENT PERSON EVER SUFFERED, NO GUILTY PERSON EVER ESCAPED; and so far is the Atonement of the Son of God from forming an exception to this rule, that it affords the most convincing evidence of its truth.

When the advocates of universal Atonement talk of the difference between a pecuniary debt and a crime, alleging that a surety may lawfully discharge the one, while he cannot justly be required to make satisfaction for the other, — when they represent the scriptural view of the Atonement as a commercial transaction, they completely lose sight of the unity of Christ and His people. The Atonement consists neither in a stranger, nor an intimate friend, undergoing what another merited, or being made answerable for another’s guilt; it is the head being made responsible for the act of the members of the spiritual body, as the members had been made responsible for the act of the head, when, by the offence of one, judgement came upon all men to condemnation, or, as the head in the natural body is responsible for the act of the members. The assassin rushes upon bis victim, and plunges a dagger in his heart, and, by the laws both of God and man, the head is responsible for the act of the feet which were swift to shed blood, and of the hand which perpetrated the crime; the murderer dies the death, and no one disputes the justice of the sentence. It is no commercial transaction; it is fulfilling the appointment of Him who is most just. In like manner, so far from the Atonement of Christ interfering with justice, it brings into a focus this glorious attribute; it demonstrates that, although the sinner had been the signet on God’s right hand, he should have been plucked off; nay, that when His only begotten and well-beloved Son had condescended to unite himself with the guilty, thus placing himself in their room, the sword awoke against Him.

It is true, Christ was holy, as God is holy; true, He did no sin, nor was guile found in his mouth; true, He was a Lamb without spot and blemish, all which was essential to his making the Atonement—for the sacrifice must be perfect to be accepted, Lev. xxii. 21; but He who knew no sin, was made sin for us; the Prince of Life entered into an indissoluble union with a dead body, that, by partaking of its death, He might impart to it life; and however men may speculate about different kinds of justice, and affirm that a guilty creature can never become an innocent one—in virtue of the Atonement of the Son of God, all his members shall be presented to him faultless, and that not figuratively, but in truth and in reality; all the sins of the redeemed are cast into the depths of the sea, and when they are sought for, they shall not be found, being completely and forever obliterated. The redeemed are justified from all things, and are invested with a robe of righteousness, such as Adam in his best estate did not possess, and such as no righteousness with which any creature is invested, can ever vie.

In the person of their glorious Surety, the redeemed have received double for all their sins, they have endured the full penalty denounced against sin. The honour of the law which they had violated is restored, by an obedience so perfect, an atonement so glorious—made not by a stranger, but by the great Head of the Church, whose unity with his members is as real as that of the Father and the Son—that the pardon of a countless number of our fallen race, more strikingly illustrates the justice and holiness of God, than if all mankind had perished. This is a great mystery, but it is undisputable, if we receive the testimony of God. This is the mystery of the faith, and it is ignorance of this mystery which gives rise to those winds of doctrine by which so many are seduced from the faith once delivered to the saints, respecting the Atonement made upon Calvary.

The doctrine of the unity of Christ and his people is highly practical; it goes to the root of the question respecting the Atonement, and dissipates the baseless figment of a commercial transaction. It vindicates the righteousness of God; it manifests his infinite wisdom; it shows that with the Omnipotent nothing is impossible; it proves that the primary object of the Son of God being manifested, was not to make an impression on the creature, but to satisfy the justice, and to vindicate the truth of the great Creator. It harmonizes mercy and truth, righteousness and peace. It maintains the perfect integrity of God’s holy law; not suffering one jot or tittle to pass unfulfilled. The rebel suffers the merited punishment of his guilt; judgement is laid to the line; and righteousness to the plummet, and the sins of all the members of Christ’s mystical body are forever buried in the grave of their Head. Sin brought the Son of God to the dust of death; He now lives unto God, and believers, having died in him, are taught to reckon themselves dead unto sin, but alive to God, through Jesus Christ, their Lord. In him they live, in him they stand, and in virtue of their union with the only begotten Son, they are brought into God’s family, and are taught to cry, Abba, Father.

Were it not for the unity of Christ and his people, justice, instead of being magnified, would have been violated in his substitution. In some other nature the same sufferings might have been endured, and they might have been declared to be the effect of God’s hatred of sin; but this would have been an act of arbitrary punishment, which could not have affected fallen man. However great the dignity of the sufferer, however deep his voluntary humiliation, it would have been no atonement for us. In order to purge our sins, in order to ransom his Church, Christ must so entirely unite himself with his people, that their sins should become his sins, that his suffering should be their suffering, and his death their death. In short, the union of believers with the Son of God is as intimate and real as that of Adam and his posterity, who all sinned and died in him. The wages of sin is death; and God required the life of a countless multitude of Adam’s race, at the hand of Him who was more than their brother, —who in the everlasting council was constituted their Father and their Covenant Head; and who in the fulness of time, assumed their flesh and blood, bore their sins in his own body on the tree, that they, being dead to sin, might live unto righteousness, being healed with his stripes.

By the announcement of his incarnation, the Church was betrothed to Christ, and the marriage takes place in the day of regeneration, when God reveals his Son in his people, when Christ takes up his abode with them, and begins to dwell in their hearts by faith. They are represented as putting on Christ, Gal. iii. 27; they put him on in the lowest state of his humiliation, Rom. vi. 3, 4, and rise to walk with him in newness of life. Thus He gathers them “one by one;” but the completion of the union, —the marriage-supper of the Lamb, will take place in the presence of an assembled universe, when He shall come, and all his saints with him, that they may enter upon the full enjoyment of the everlasting mansions which He has gone before to prepare.

How much concerned ought believers to be, to walk worthy of God onto all pleasing? Are we, through union with Christ, adopted into the family of God? how carefully ought we to cherish the spirit of adoption! Hath God, who is faithful, called us into the fellowship of his dear Son, Jesus Christ our Lord? 1 Cor. i. 9; how solicitous should we be habitually to recollect that God hath not called us to uncleanness, but onto holiness! that Christ and Belial have no concord, and that the truth effectually worketh in all who believe!

We have seen that the unity of Christ and the Church is as real as that of the head and the members of the human body; and as there is no schism in the natural body, there ought to be none in the body of Christ. All the members ought to have the same care one of another, 1 Cor. xii. 25. “For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because 1 am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? and if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? if the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body as it hath pleased him. And if they were all one member, where were the body? but now are they many members, yet but one body. And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee; nor again, the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body which seem to be more feeble are necessary,” 1 Cor. xii. 12-22. “We are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.” Again, believers are exhorted to grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ, “From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body, unto the edifying of itself in love,” Eph. iv. 16.

There is the most perfect sympathy in the members of the natural body, 1 Cor. xii. 26; and so will it hereafter be, in the body of Christ, and so would it even now be were it not for the baneful effects of indwelling sin. The seed of the woman, when delivered from the power of Satan, and translated into the kingdom of God’s dear Son, are, while in this world, in a state of transition; both Adam and Christ live in them, and hence they have much in common with the seed of the serpent. They are, indeed, renewed in the spirit of their mind, —they have put on the new man, —they delight in the law of God; but a law in their members war against the law of their mind, so that they cannot do the things that they would, —their transformation is imperfect; but hereafter they shall be like Christ, for they shall see him as he is. Their connexion with fallen Adam shall then be entirely done away; the old man shall be completely put off; they shall be satisfied when they awake, with God’s likeness.

At present the perfect sympathy winch ought to subsist in the body of Christ is only seen in the glorious Head of the Church; he fully sympathizes both with the joys and sorrows of his people. Observe his care of Israel after the flesh, who were but an emblem of the true Israel. “He found him in a desert land, and in the waste howling wilderness; he led him about, he instructed him, he kept him as the apple of his eye. As an eagle stirreth up her nest, fluttereth over her young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings; so the Lord alone did lead him, and there was no strange God with him. He made him ride on the high places of the earth, that he might eat the increase of the fields: and he made him to suck honey out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty rock; butter of kine, and milk of sheep, with fat of lambs, and rams of the breed of Bashan, and goats, with the fat of kidneys of wheat; and thou didst drink the pure blood of the grape,” Deut. xxxii. 10—14. In all their affliction he was afflicted; he that toucheth them toucheth the apple of his eye, Zech. ii. 8. In regard to the true Israel, an injury done to a disciple, is done to Christ, and an act of kindness to one of his people he will acknowledge as done to himself. When Saul was on his way to Damascus breathing out slaughter and threatenings against the disciples of the Lord, “there shined round about him a light from heaven: And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus, whom thou persecutest,” Acts ix. 3—5.

He represents himself when seated on the throne of judgement, as acknowledging the kindness shown to the least of his brethren, “And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily, I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me,” Mat. xxv. 40. On the other hand, disregard of his people is visited with his heavy displeasure. “Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily, I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me,” Mat. xxv. 45. The final state of mankind will be irrevocably fixed according to their attachment to, or alienation from, the brethren of Christ. This is the infallible test of our state and character. All the seed of the woman, — the brethren of Christ, are taught of God to love one another, 1 Thess. iv. 9; while the natural enmity to Christ, and his people—although it may be restrained by external circumstances—remains unbroken in the seed of the serpent, Gen. iii. 15.

Christ still suffers in his members; the satisfaction to justice was completed on the cross, but the redeemed must, through much tribulation, enter into the kingdom of God; they must all drink of his cup; and hence the Apostle represents himself as filling up, by his sufferings for his brethren, “that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the church,” Col. i. 24. The sentence passed on mankind while they sojourn in this world, Gen. iii. 17—19, has taken hold of the redeemed as well as of others; it is a part of their fellowship with Him who was a man of sorrows. But they shall soon put off this earthly tabernacle, be clothed with their house which is from heaven, and partake of the glory into which he has entered. The mysterious fellowship will then appear in all its lustre; Christ will be seen in his fulness; his body will be complete, not a member superfluous or lacking, and having accomplished the glorious end of the mediatorial kingdom,—having fulfilled God’s eternal purpose by making known to the principalities and powers in heavenly places his manifold wisdom,—having put down all rule, and authority, and power, which interfered with the universal dominion committed to him, he will, as the first born and heir of the whole creation, deliver up the kingdom to Him who put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

CHAPTER VI.

The Nature of The Atonement.

ATONEMENT means expiation of guilt, satisfaction for an offence committed. It is used in Scripture interchangeably with reconciliation. If sufficient, it removes the ground of variance, so that the offender and the offended walk in harmony. God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself not imputing their trespasses unto them; their iniquities were blotted out as a cloud, and their transgressions as a thick cloud. This was not the effect of any change in the Divine mind in regard to sin, for God is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity; He cannot look upon sin. It was the effect of the sacrifice of the Son of God, who, being made under the law, which his people had broken, by his perfect obedience magnified and made it honourable, and, by enduring its curse in the character of their surety and substitute, removed their guilt, redeemed them from death, delivered them from the power of Satan, and translated them into his everlasting kingdom.

The Hebrew word rendered Atonement, signifies COVERING. By the death of Jesus, the sins of his people are covered, so that when they are sought for they shall not be found. Hence the Apostle describes the blessedness of the man whose sins are covered. The covering of the ark which contained the tables of the law, was called the mercy-seat; it was the throne of God, who dwelt between the cherubim in the midst of his chosen people. Thus was represented the union of justice and mercy in the character of the God of Israel. The law had been broken, but, as it is unchangeable, the tables were renewed, and, by God’s appointment, a covering was provided for them.

The covenant of redemption was made in the everlasting council. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—the one Jehovah—took part in the accomplishment of this most wonderful transaction. In the fulness of time, the Word was made flesh; a body was prepared by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the Virgin, and the Father sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to be the Head of a countless multitude, who had been chosen in him, and to whom, as the objects of God’s everlasting love, eternal life had been promised before the world began, Tit i. 2.

The great mystery of godliness, is God manifest in the flesh, 1 Tim. iii. 16. Although all the fulness of the Godhead dwelt in him bodily, he appeared in the form of a servant, and was in all things conformed to the will of Him that sent him. He neither did, nor spoke anything of himself. By the Holy Spirit given to him without measure, he taught that doctrine which he had heard and learned of his Father, performing those mighty works which proved his divine mission; and, having fulfilled all that was written of him in the Scriptures of truth, he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. No man took his life from him; he laid it down of himself. This commandment he had received from his Father. There was no remission of sin under the law of Moses without the shedding of blood, and this was a figure of the shedding of the blood of the Lamb of God, by which the sins of the true Israel are removed. He was in the bosom of his Father; he was fully acquainted with his most secret purposes. He made his soul an offering for sin, he knew the sacrifice was accepted, and, in token of this, he resumed the life which he had voluntarily laid down. The unity of the Godhead is exhibited in the resurrection of Jesus. It is ascribed to the Father: — “He was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father,” Rom. vi. 4; it is ascribed to himself: — “I lay down my life that I might take it again,” John x. 17; and also to the Holy Spirit: — “He was put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit,” 1 Pet. iii. 18.

Thus was every part of the plan of salvation conducted by Him whose law had been violated. The malignity of sin was made known by the infinite price of the redemption of those whom Christ is not ashamed to call brethren. The Son of God was at once the priest and the offering: in his divine nature, he was equally incapable of humiliation and exaltation, but he was found in fashion as a man, and with his own full consent, —after passing the days of his pilgrimage upon this earth, which had been cursed for man’s sake, —he was brought to the dust of death. But the Prince of life could not be held under its power. He died a victim to sin, and descended into the lower parts of the earth? Then, for the first time, the grave said, “It is enough.” Justice and truth descended from heaven to roll away the stone from the sepulchre; mercy and peace took part in the work, and the Son of God came forth from the grave as the first-born of many brethren, the Head of the new creation. In that nature in which he had endured such deep humiliation, as the reward of his work, he ascended far above all heavens, that he might fill all things; and thus was the Son glorified with the glory which he had with the Father before the world was. Not only did the decree go forth that every knee should bow to him, and every tongue confess that he is Lord, to the glory of God the Father, but angels, principalities, and powers are subjected to the Son of man, who has for ever sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens, holding the reins of universal dominion, and having received power over all flesh, that he might give eternal life to as many as God hath given him.

Before his ascension, he commanded his ambassadors to go into all the world, and to preach the glad tidings of pardon, through faith in his name, to mankind, assuring them of his presence and countenance to the end of the world. The Apostles were eminently qualified for the work in which they were to be engaged; they were taught, not by man but by God, the gospel which they were to preach; still they felt that, like the prophet, they were in the valley of dry bones, and that Paul may plant and Apollos water, but God giveth the increase. The Lord alone knoweth them that are his, the travail of his soul, the purchase of his blood; but they are manifested by listening to his voice, by being made willing in a day of power. By means of the truth, he enters their heart; and although Satan be not immediately expelled; although he still maintain an unholy warfare; the children of God, after being made conformable to the death of their elder Brother, shall, like him, be brought from the dead through the blood by which the everlasting covenant was ratified. Such is the nature of the Atonement of Christ, in which is given the fullest manifestation of the Divine glory.

The redemption of the Church of God is illustrated by the right of redemption in Israel. If an Israelite, —for this law respected Israel alone, waxed poor, and had been sold for debt, he might redeem himself, or any of his near kinsmen might redeem him. Now Jesus, by his incarnation, became the near kinsman, the brother of his people, and consequently had the right of redemption. They were all the sons of his mother, were all named after him, the seed of the woman, Gen. iii. 15; Rev. xii. 17. They were sold under sin, had incurred condemnation, but he redeemed them from the curse of the law, being made a curse for them. They had trampled on the Divine authority, but he restored what he took not away. The first man dishonoured God by rebellion; the second Man, the Lord from heaven, gave glory to God in the highest, by magnifying the law, and making it honourable.

The fallen angels departed from God: what was their offence we know not, but it involved them in swift destruction, and they are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness to the judgement of the great day.[††††] Mankind were, by the sin of Adam, in whom they were created, involved in the same condemnation. They had violated the law of God, which is light, and their lamp was put out in obscure darkness, so that amidst all the glories of creation, proclaiming the eternal power and Godhead of the Most High, they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. Had they been left to themselves, had not an Atonement been provided, the chains of darkness, — like those which bind the fallen angels, and which have forever excluded them from the knowledge and enjoyment of God,—would have been everlasting; but God had thoughts of mercy to an innumerable multitude of the race of Adam, whom it was His eternal purpose, not only to pluck as brands from the burning, but, in their salvation, to give to the principalities and powers in heavenly places the most conspicuous view of His character, and to exhibit the perfect harmony of those glorious attributes which, to every created intelligence, seemed irreconcilable.

Both God’s justice and truth appeared irrevocably pledged for the destruction of fallen man. A law had been given him, sanctioned by the penalty of death; in other words, destruction from the presence of the Lord, —separation from the source of purity, holiness, and happiness. This law had been violated, —the penalty incurred; justice and truth seemed imperatively to demand that the sentence should be executed. There was no eye to pity. Mankind lay under the curse of the Almighty; and all God’s obedient and intelligent creation regarded with loathing and disgust the lost and ruined family. There was no hand to help. The thought of interfering in their behalf would have been rebellion and misery; He who says to the sea, Hitherto shalt thou come but no farther, and here shall thy proud waves be staid, had permitted Satan to triumph over man, — to involve him, as he imagined, in the same hopeless misery in which himself was involved; but his success was made the means of his own punishment and degradation. He had by conquest become the god of this world. All mankind were by nature the children of wrath, led captive by the devil at his will. They were given over to the hand of a cruel lord, and a fierce king ruled over them; but his triumph was short; the coming of the second Man, the Head of God’s elect, who was to contend with him upon his own ground, was immediately announced. He was to recover from the usurped dominion of Satan a countless multitude, who should be raised to a state of glory, security, and happiness, of which Adam’s first estate, although he were made in the image of God, was but a figure; and so far from the justice of God being tarnished by the forgiveness of sin, it was more gloriously illustrated than if all mankind had forever perished. So astonishing is the channel through which the mercy of God flows to sinners, that the angels desire to look into it; and the glory of the character of God, —his unspotted purity, his inviolable justice, and his eternal truth, —are placed in a point of view which no created understanding could have conceived. This subject is too vast for our comprehension; it passeth knowledge; but the outline is revealed with sufficient clearness, while we are guarded against intruding into those things which we “have not seen, vainly puffed up in our fleshly mind.”

We are not for a moment to suppose that the Atonement was necessary to change the feelings of the Father towards those in whose behalf it was offered. No. He gave his elect, —the objects of his unchangeable everlasting love, —to his Son. The “counsel of peace stood between them both,” but the Atonement was essentially necessary, in order that this love might flow to them in an honourable channel; that, so far from the glory of God being tarnished by their salvation, every Divine attribute might be placed in a more conspicuous point of view; while a multitude which no man can number shall be brought from the dead, — clothed in the everlasting righteousness of the Son of God, and adorned with all the beauties of holiness, —to the enjoyment of an exceeding, even an eternal weight of glory; so that in their redemption God shall appear glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders.

We have seen that the Surety and Substitute of fallen man must be a Divine Person. While every creature is at the absolute disposal of its Creator, He could not, in consistency with his glorious perfections, make one creature responsible for the sin of another. But in the redemption of his people, by the incarnation, sufferings, and death, of his only begotten Son, an exhibition is made to the universe of the infinite treasures of wisdom and knowledge which are hid in God. Here all his glorious attributes are fully manifested.

We are taught that it became Him for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.[‡‡‡‡] In himself he was absolutely perfect, —holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from, sinners; but, as the Saviour of his people, He was made perfect, Heb. ii. 6. Sin and suffering are inseparable: in order to the salvation of his people, he must bear their sins in his own body on the tree, —he must be made sin for them, and suffer its just demerits, that, their guilt being expiated, he might justly claim their restoration to God and happiness, and confer upon them an exceeding and an eternal weight of glory.

While the people of God are complete in Christ, during their abode in this world they bear about with them a body of sin and death. Their intercourse with their God and Father is maintained through their great High Priest and Advocate. No man cometh to the Father, but by Him whoever liveth to make intercession, not for the world, but for those who were given him by the Father, John xvii. 9. He is the Friend of sinners, but he is Jesus Christ the righteous; for his intercession is founded on the perfection of the expiation which he made for his people upon the cross. He is the Mediator between God and man, the Surety of the everlasting covenant, through whom every spiritual and heavenly blessing descends upon his brethren, the children of that covenant, while in him they have boldness and access with confidence into the holiest of all. No wonder the Apostle determined to know nothing in his intercourse with the people of God but Jesus Christ, and him crucified. This is the true light by which alone any of our fallen race can possibly be enlightened; for thus our guilt, which as a thick cloud concealed God from our view, is removed. To every child of Adam in his natural state, God dwells in impenetrable darkness; but, says the Apostle, we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true; and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life. Little children, keep yourselves from idols, Amen, 1 John v. 20,21. We may compare this with our Lord's words: “And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent.” John xvii. 3. Unless we have seen God as He has revealed himself in our crucified and risen Redeemer, we worship we know not what; and it is of little consequence whether the object of our worship be a stock or a stone, or an idol of our own imagination.

CHAPTER VII.

Extent of the Atonement.

THE extent of the Atonement is involved in its nature and essence. Differences on this subject always originate in a difference in regard to the nature of the Atonement itself. The withering of Jonah’s gourd was but a symptom; the disease lay at the root. When men are agreed about the nature of the Atonement, they will soon be at one respecting its extent. When a real atonement, expiation, or satisfaction for sin, is admitted, it must of necessity be restricted to those whose guilt it cancels. Where, on the other hand, the Saviour’s sufferings and death are viewed as “that which shall preserve to the moral government of God that powerful control over its subjects which the entrance of sin endangered, and which its unconditional forgiveness would have entirely destroyed,”[§§§§] there will, of course, be a virtual denial of the substitution of Christ for his people.

The doctrine of Universal Atonement sets aside the Atonement altogether. If the world, for which Christ is the propitiation, be not saved, it is evident the propitiation was not sufficient for the salvation of those for whom it was made. If Christ’s sacrifice were accepted, it must have been accepted in behalf of all for whom it was offered. It cannot have been accepted in part, and rejected in part; it was either a work gloriously complete, or, to borrow Dr Jenkyn’s language, “an entire failure.” All the sacrifices enjoined by the law had a definite object; if the Atonement were made for the lost, as well as for the saved, no man is saved by it; his salvation rests on some other foundation. It may be replied, —Salvation is of faith. It is so; but whence is faith? Is it not the effect of the believer having been redeemed from the curse of the law, —of his being reconciled unto God by the cross, by which the enmity of man’s heart is slain, through the removal of his guilt? Eph. ii. 16. Why are the things of the Spirit of God foolishness to the natural man? Why cannot the carnal mind be subject to the law of God? Why is the understanding darkened? Why are sinners alienated from the life of God through the ignorance and darkness that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart? Why, being past feeling, have men given themselves over to work all uncleanness with greediness? Why, in short, is the heart deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked? Why does no good thing dwell in fallen man? Why, —but because he is by nature a child of wrath, under the curse, which separates him from the Fountain of all goodness, purity, and holiness; while those whose sins are covered, are brought nigh to God by the blood of Christ.

By the Atonement, the elect are redeemed from the curse of the law; their guilt is expiated, and they are in consequence made partakers of every spiritual and heavenly blessing in Christ Jesus. Hence the Apostle connects redemption from the curse of the law with the blessing of Abraham coming upon the Gentiles, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith, Gal iii. 13, 14; and the Scripture declares “that He who spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, will with him also freely give us all things.” It must be so; for, as has been observed, nothing but guilt can separate the creature from its Creator, and prevent its enjoying the tokens of his love. Here, then, is the secret of the new birth, —of the new creation of sinners in Christ Jesus. In the death of their elder Brother, all the children whom God had given to his Son endured the penalty of their guilt derived from the first Adam, and are, in consequence, called, justified, and glorified in the second Adam. As their disobedience and disregard of God resulted from their guilt and condemnation, their walking in newness of life is the certain consequence of their justification: On the other hand, the seed of the serpent remain in the gall of bitterness and bond of iniquity. The gifts of faith and repentance are not bestowed upon all who hear the Gospel; it comes to many only in word, and is, consequently, an aggravation of their guilt, —the savour of death unto death, while by far the greater part of mankind, during eighteen hundred years, have lived without Christ, having no hope, and without God in the world.

Had the Atonement been made for all, all would have become dead to the law by the body of Christ; their old man, being crucified with Christ, would have been destroyed, that henceforth they should not serve sin; being dead, they would have been justified from sin, Rom. vi. 7, which, consequently, could not have had dominion over them, for they would not have been under the. law, but under grace, Rom. vi. 14.

The new system palpably makes void the Atonement. The incarnation and death of Christ are represented merely as an expression of God’s displeasure against sin, so that the honour of His government might be maintained while He pardoned the elect. This is precisely the old Socinian doctrine, that justice did not require Atonement to be made for sin; that the only difficulty was to make a suitable impression upon men, and to prevail upon them to be reconciled to God, as if Atonement and reconciliation were not synonymous. What is the meaning of reconciling the holy places, Lev. xvi. 20, but making atonement for them, —purifying them with blood, to render them a suitable habitation for Him with whom evil cannot dwell? But how are the honour of God’s government and the rights of justice vindicated by the sufferings of an innocent person, however exalted? and how derogatory is it to the Divine character, that God should be manifest in the flesh, that he might suffer and die to “preserve to the moral government of God that powerful control over its subjects which the entrance of sin endangered?” In other words, the object of the Atonement was to save appearances, and to prevent the Divine government falling into contempt! This is not the Gospel of Christ; this is not the revelation of God’s righteousness; it confounds guilt and innocence; it punishes the innocent, and lets the guilty escape.

No doubt, endangering the Divine government is a sublime idea, but in it we have an illustration of the proximity of the sublime and the ridiculous. Endanger the government of Him who dwelleth in the light to which no man can approach! before whom all nations are as nothing! Yes: His government may be endangered, as the life of Jesus was endangered in crossing the sea of Galilee; but a word hushed the tempest and calmed the sea!

The Scripture teaches us that the unity of the Godhead subsists in Three Persons. This part of revelation is not intended to gratify our curiosity; it is a fact of which we can give no explanation: if we receive it at all, we must receive it as little children. Yet it is eminently practical; for upon this mysterious truth is founded the whole plan of redemption, in which each of the Divine Persons is represented as acting an important part, and all in perfect harmony; “there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God that worketh all in all,” 1 Cor. xii. 6. Universal redemption destroys this harmony; the elect are chosen in, and given to, the Son; but he lays down his life, not merely for them, but for all mankind. This is a palpable denial of the unity of the Father and the Son, —a unity so perfect, that the Lord declares, “He that seeth me seeth Him that sent me,” John xii. 45; “Christ is the image of the invisible God,” Col. i. 15; “the express image of his person,” Heb. i. 3; “the Son can do nothing of himself but what he seeth the Father do: for whatsoever things He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise,” John v. 19. Every part of our Lord’s conduct upon earth was an act of obedience to the will of his Father: — “I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me,” John vi. 38. He did not even speak of himself: “The Father which sent me, He gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak,” John xii. 49. How, then, could he lay down his life for any but for those who were given him of the Father to be redeemed from among men? Had he laid down his life for all mankind, he would have gone beyond his commission; he would have done what he had not seen the Father do.

The law of his life upon earth was implicit submission to his Father’s will. He wept over the impending downfall and misery of Jerusalem, but he could not go beyond the councils of eternity to avert these calamities. If in the tenderness of his love and compassion he would have gathered Jerusalem, as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings,: the language of his heart must still have been, “not MY will, but THINE be done.” What we know not now, we shall know hereafter; but this we do know, that it has not been the holy will of God to bestow salvation on more than a remnant of mankind, —a “little flock,” compared with the world at large, although “a multitude which no man can number.” This is a matter of fact declared in Scripture, and made evident to the eye of sense, when we look abroad on the world which lieth in wickedness. If, then, salvation be limited to those whom the Father’s electing love gave to his Son, how could the Son go beyond the purpose of Him whose will he came to do? How could he give his life for those whom the Father never knew, whom the Holy Spirit will never sanctify, whom the Son himself will forever reject, when, beholding his blood-bought sheep, —the members of his body the Church, “he shall see of the travail of his soul, and be satisfied?” The unity of the will of Christ with that of the eternal Father, is of itself conclusive on the subject of the extent of the Atonement; it DEMONSTRATES that the Atonement was made only for the Church.

Jesus has now received power over all flesh, that he might give eternal life to as many as the Father hath given him, John xvii. 2. Hence he says, “I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them whom thou hast given me; for they are thine,” John xvii. 9. Atonement and intercession are inseparable; they are component parts of the priestly office, and cannot be disjoined; consequently, to represent Christ as dying for the world, while he expressly disclaims praying for the world, is evidently most unscriptural.

The legal sacrifices were offered only for Israel; their sins alone were laid upon the head of the scape-goat on the great day of atonement. These were “patterns of things in the heavens,” and have their fulfilment in the Atonement offered for the true Israel. The middle wall of partition is now broken down; no man is known after the flesh; those who are Christ’s are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. The glad tidings of peace and pardon, through the faith of Jesus, are preached to all who come under the sound of the Gospel. Salvation is bestowed upon believers, to whatever nation they may belong; and hence those general expressions are employed, by which many have been led to suppose that an Atonement has been made for all mankind, which is utterly subversive of the doctrine of Scripture, and which, in fact, makes void the Atonement altogether. If the Atonement were sufficient, the sins of all for whom it was offered are expiated, —are removed as far as the east is from the west. This requires no proof; it is self-evident. The sword of justice could not smite both the Shepherd and the flock; the Surety, and those whom he represented. In Christ’s death, all the members of his mystical body died; thus they received the wages of sin, and are, therefore, no longer under the law, but under grace. In the resurrection of their great Head and Surety, they have received a full discharge; for he who was delivered for their offences, was raised again for their justification.

No doubt, ungodly men may pervert the Gospel, turning the grace of God into lasciviousness, and making light of sin. But it is written, “Without holiness no man shall see the Lord.” Although believers are not under the law, but under grace, they are under the law to Christ, who has engaged that sin shall not have dominion over them. He saves his people from their sins, and in the great day they shall be distinguished from them that know not God, by the fruits of righteousness, which, through union with Christ, they have brought forth. The dead shall be judged, every man according to their works, Rev. xx. 12, 13. “And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them,” Rev. xiv. 13.

There is probably no refuge of lies to which men so frequently resort, as the plea that all will be well, because Christ died for them. The conclusion is sure, but the premises are false, in regard to many who urge the plea. All for whom the Saviour died, shall, doubtless, obtain the salvation that is in Christ, with eternal glory. He is the Surety of the new covenant; it was ratified with his blood; and so glorious is the sacrifice, that God no more remembers the sins of the children of the covenant, and writes His law upon their hearts. It is impossible that payment should be demanded both of the Surety and those whose cause he undertook. Men may speculate about different kinds of justice, and perplex themselves and their readers with statements respecting the various characters which God sustains, and by which his conduct is modified; but the Scripture uniformly describes our violation of the law as a debt which we have contracted, for which payment is demanded, and which was fully made for all Christ’s brethren, when he died upon the cross for their sins.

CHAPTER VIII.

Effects of the Atonement.

MAN was originally created in the image of God; but this image could only be retained by his continuing to contemplate the glorious object which he originally reflected. No sooner did Satan succeed in changing the truth of God into a lie in the mind of man, —no sooner did he persuade Adam that the Almighty was false, jealous, and envious, thus substituting his own hateful character instead of the glorious character of God, than he became the god of this world. While man beheld God as he had revealed himself, he reflected the lovely image; but when he gave credit to the falsehood of Satan, it was as when a beautiful object is removed from before a mirror, and something loathsome and disgusting substituted in its place. Having lost the knowledge of God, fallen man reflected the image of Satan, the new god whom he had chosen; he was now of his father the devil, and like him, his heart had become deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked.

Hence the necessity of our being born again, being created anew, before we can enter the kingdom of heaven, or be recognized as the children of God; and this change is effected by beholding the Father as he is revealed in his Son. Thus the image of God is restored to fallen man, and the new man (Christ Jesus) is put on, which, after God, is created in righteousness and true holiness. And how is the Father revealed in the Son? As the God of love; the just God and the Saviour, not sparing his own Son, but delivering him up, that a countless multitude might, in him, their Elder Brother, their Surety, and Substitute, yield perfect obedience to the holy law, endure the penalty of disobedience, and be raised to glory, honour, and immortality, in perfect harmony with truth and justice. It is only through the rent vail of the Redeemer’s flesh that fallen man can look upon God. In Him, —who (during his pilgrimage on earth, exhibited every Divine perfection, and who, as the Head of his body the Church, passed through the dark valley of death into the glory which he had with the Father before the world was, —we behold the glory of the Divine character, and are changed into the image of God. Hence Christ is called the light of the world, and those who follow him do not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.

The change thus produced is described as a new birth. Its subjects are renewed in the spirit of their mind; it is a spiritual change effected by Jesus, manifesting himself to us as he doth not to the world; by the Holy Spirit taking of the things of Christ, and showing them to us. It is the communication of a new sense, by which we discern spiritual things, to which we were formerly blind. The instrument employed by the Spirit is the word of God, which testifies of Christ, who is called the truth, because in him alone can we behold the True God, 1 John v. 20. Guilt had shut out God from our view; in his most righteous indignation He had covered himself with a cloud, through which our prayers could not pass; but, as the wickedness of the generation before the flood was the means of producing the most beautiful object in nature, so the introduction of sin has led to a development of the Divine character such as it had neither entered into the heart of men nor of angels to conceive; and believers behold the throne of their covenant God, encircled with a rainbow, Rev. iv. 3, in which all the attributes of Jehovah are gloriously blended, while its splendour is augmented by the blackness of the cloud upon which it rests.

Believers are said to be born either of the Spirit or of the Word, because they have obeyed the truth through the Spirit. “Thy Word,” says the Psalmist, “hath quickened me,” Ps. cxix. 50. The first Adam, in whom all mankind were created, was made a living soul; the last Adam, in whom believers are created anew, is a quickening Spirit, who came that his people might have life, and might have it more abundantly. In the death of Adam, the fountain of natural life was dried up, and consequently the streams must fail; but as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself, and Christ is a perennial fountain of eternal life to all his children.

Here we behold the beautiful harmony between the fall and the restoration of man, between his corruption and sanctification. He was corrupted by falsehood, he is sanctified by truth; Satan entered his heart in the form of a lie, and God resumes his authority through the truth as it is in Jesus, which gives the sinner the knowledge of salvation by the remission of his sins, through the blood-shedding of the Son of God. The falsehood of Satan, effectually wrought in the heart of Adam, effacing the Divine image, and substituting his own in its stead; the truth as it is in Jesus “effectually works” in all who believe, and thus the Divine purpose that the followers of Christ should be conformed to the image of the Son of God, is fulfilled.

The Gospel reveals God as just, and the justifier of the ungodly. The honour of the holy law and the truth of the threatening against its violation are fully vindicated in the humiliation, suffering, and death of the Son of God, and of all the members of his mystical body, in their Covenant Head. The Gospel is called the word of reconciliation, because Christ hath made peace through the blood of his cross, hath turned away the anger of God from his brethren, whom he thus delivers from the power of Satan, and translates into his everlasting kingdom, by manifesting himself to them in a way he doth not to the world. The Gospel is to be addressed to all; long was the knowledge of God confined to one family, but now He commands all men everywhere to repent, and Christ is exalted to give repentance and eternal life to all the Israel of God.

By the Gospel, the wheat is separated from the chaff; as both are put into the fan, so the Gospel is addressed equally to the seed of the woman and to the seed of the serpent. To the one, it is the savour of life, —to the other, the savour of death; hence it is represented as a two-edged sword proceeding out of the Redeemer’s mouth. It resembles the pillar interposed between the Egyptians and Israel, — “It was a cloud and darkness to them, but it gave light by night for these.” If our Gospel, says the apostle, be hid, it is hid to them that are lost; if men receive not the Atonement made upon Calvary, as the only ground of their hope, —if they do not take shelter under the Saviour’s wings, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgement and fiery indignation, which shall devour them as the implacable adversaries of God.

CHAPTER IX.

The Manifestation of Divine Justice and Truth in the Atonement.

WE have seen that in the wonderful plan of man’s salvation, the fullest display is given of the perfect harmony of all the Divine attributes, more especially of justice and mercy, which appear at irreconcilable variance in the treatment of an offender. The redeemed are not only pardoned, but justified, —pronounced righteous by Him who is most just, whose judgement is according to truth. Hence the Gospel is termed the revelation of God’s righteousness, with which, as we have seen, the believer is invested. We might have expected it to be termed the revelation of his mercy, but, what is most astonishing, grace reigns through righteousness unto eternal life.

The bestowment of mercy on fallen man also appeared incompatible with the truth of the declaration, — “The soul that sinneth it shall die;” but in virtue of the unity of Christ and his people, of the Sanctifier and them that are sanctified, he endured the curse which they had incurred; and as they had all sinned in Adam, in Christ they suffered the penalty of sin, and, consequently, are justified from all things by the God of truth.

Nothing is more degrading to the wisdom and power of God, than to represent the plan of salvation as an expedient to remedy an untoward event. So far from this being a just view of the matter, the world was made to be a theatre for the display of the glory of the Son of God; all things were made by him, and for him, Col. i. 16; yet a late writer represents the Almighty as governing the world by means of feeble expedients, and speaks of the fall as the “entire failure of the Eden dispensation,” and what took place in Israel, as “the entire failure of the Sinai experiment;”[*****] while in the word of God, both the introduction of sin and the perverseness of Israel, are represented as subservient to the fulfilment of the eternal purpose of God, for the manifestation of his own glory.

God is his own chief end. It cannot be otherwise; this is the highest possible object, and is inseparably connected with the happiness of all his intelligent and obedient creatures; for the contemplation of the Divine glory is the great source of their enjoyment. The more fully the Divine glory is revealed, the greater the enjoyment of those who surround his throne.

Dr Wardlaw, in his late publication on the Atonement, has quoted the following passage from my work on Man’s Responsibility. “The prevalent notion at present is, not that by his incarnation, sufferings, and death, Christ made atonement for those whose sins he bore in his own body on the tree, —thus cancelling their guilt, and opening a channel through which mercy and love flow to them in perfect consistency with justice, —but that the manifestation of the Son of God was designed as a public display, in order to maintain the honour of the Divine government. What a view does this give of Him before whom the nations are a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust in the balance. Was God manifest in the flesh? Did the Creator of the world, in our nature, suffer and die, merely to produce an impression upon the minds of rebels, and to prevent his government from sinking into contempt! No. It was that he might be JUST, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus; that he might be faithful and just in forgiving the sins of those whose great Head and Surety, according to his covenant engagements, endured the penalty which they had incurred, and yielded to the law which they had broken, the obedience which it demanded.” He then goes on to animadvert on “the lightness with which this writer treats the idea of a public display” and asks, if it be “of no importance, provided God be just, whether, in the eyes of his intelligent creation, he appear just?” Again: “Is this a matter of which He himself, in his word, ever speaks in terms which indicate his not thinking it worth his minding?”[†††††]

In the passage referred to, I have not denied the importance of God’s appearing just and holy in the eyes of his intelligent creatures; but, however light it may appear to Dr Wardlaw, I repeat, that the representation of the Atonement as having been intended to maintain the honour of the Divine government in the eyes of his creatures, is altogether unworthy of God. IT WAS HIS ESSENTIAL JUSTICE AND TRUTH WHICH REQUIRED THE ATONEMENT. It was made, not merely that He might appear just, but because He was really just, otherwise it would not have been a manifestation but a misrepresentation of his character. We are told, “It became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings,” Heb. ii. 10.

The manifestation of God’s glorious attributes was a secondary object; it was indeed of unspeakable importance, because it exhibited the treasures of wisdom and knowledge which were hid in God, while it promoted his glory by the advancement of the happiness of the universe; but if sinners are pardoned through the Atonement, not because justice and truth imperatively required it, but to save appearances, then the Atonement gives a false view of the Divine procedure; it represents God acting for effect, and not from the innate perfection of his own most glorious character. A Roman historian sums up his panegyric on one of his heroes, by saying, he was more desirous of being than of seeming to be good; and shall we—with the Scripture in our hands, which tells us that “God made all things for himself,” that “of him, and through him, and to him are all things,” —represent him as giving up his Son to the death, for the purpose of making an impression on the minds of his creatures? The hearts of men and angels are in his hands, and He makes on them what impression He pleases. It was therefore altogether unnecessary that He should deliver his only begotten to shame, humiliation, and death, in order to produce an impression which might have been made without such an expense. His administration does not, like human governments, “hang on the thread of opinion which the touch of chance may break,” but rests immoveably upon his own infinite wisdom and almighty power.

Dr Wardlaw cannot hold more strongly than I do, that the glory of God is the grand end of creation, and of all his dealings with the children of men. When God threatened to destroy Israel, Moses made intercession in their behalf, and what was the plea which he urged? The dishonour which would fall upon the God of Israel, Exod. xxxii. 12; Numb. xiv. 15, 16. When the army of Israel was defeated before Ai, Joshua urges the same plea, — “What wilt thou do to thy great name?” Josh. vii. 9. And when the Lord promises to bestow upon Israel all spiritual and heavenly blessings, He says, “I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name’s sake,” Ezek. xxxvi. 22. These and many other passages demonstrate that regard to his own glory is the primary motive of God’s dealings even with his chosen people, the objects of his everlasting love.

The difference between the system of Dr Wardlaw and that of the Scriptures is this: Dr Wardlaw teaches that the Atonement was a display; the Scriptures represent it as a reality. The Atonement, according to the former, is nothing better than a make believe, —a show, —a shadow of justice without the substance. It is of this system I have spoken, not so much in terms of lightness, as of scorn; and I trust that Dr Wardlaw will himself be brought to view the language which he has used, in regard to the justice of God and the Atonement of Christ, with sorrow and humiliation.

In the treatise on which he animadverts, I have insisted much on the fact, that the Lord magnified the law, and made it honourable. How could this be done in the view of creation, except by the manifestation of the glory and honour with which, by the Saviour’s incarnation, it was crowned? In the same treatise, I have spoken of the work of Christ as “having exhibited to the universe the unsearchable riches of Divine wisdom;” but while I have thus dwelt on the importance of the manifestation of the Divine glory, I have also resisted to the utmost the idea that this manifestation was a mere scenic exhibition of what had no existence; that there was an appearance without the reality. In opposition to this, I have maintained that the sins of the redeemed were laid upon Christ; —that he bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, might live unto righteousness, and are healed by his stripes; —that our Substitute has endured the curse, that we might inherit a blessing.

CHAPTER X.

Impropriety of Confounding the Death Threatened for Disobedience, with the Sentence of Fallen Man’s Returning to the Dust.

IT is justly observed by Dr Owen, that all errors respecting the Atonement, originate in not understanding our connexion with Adam. No man apprehends the truth of our having sinned and died in Adam, till his high imaginations are cast down by the power of the Holy Spirit. The imputation of the first Adam’s sin, and of the second Adam’s righteousness, is the very essence of the Gospel. This imputation is not an arbitrary act; it necessarily results from the relation in which the children of the first and second covenants stand to their respective heads. When this is understood, it will be readily admitted, that a real Atonement was made upon Calvary; and where it is denied, the substitution of Christ for his people is necessarily made void.

Many are misled by supposing that the death threatened in case of Adam’s disobedience, means the separation of soul and body, and, consequently, they maintain that the sentence was not executed. Had Adam returned to the dust on the day of his transgression, there would have been an end of the human race. But the death threatened was separation from God, in whose favour is life, Psal. xxx. 5. This sentence was not suspended; Adam died on the day of his transgression; he was at once alienated from the life of God; no good thing now dwelt in him, and he proved his enmity, as well as his folly, by hiding himself among the trees of the garden.

Immediately after the fall, mankind were divided into two great families, the seed of the woman, and the seed of the serpent. The former were heirs of salvation, —the children of promise, —the brethren of Him who, in the fulness of time, was made of a woman, made under the law; the latter were “the children of the wicked one.” But the lot of both in this world was to be the same; all, irrespective of character, were to eat their bread in sorrow, and then return to the dust, from which they were to be raised, in order to the complete and final separation which was then to take place.

The sentence, “Dust thou art, and to dust thou shalt return,” was not then the fulfilment of the threatening, “On the day thou eatest thou shalt surely die.” The latter has taken hold of every child of Adam, in consequence of which all are by nature children of wrath, —dead in trespasses and sins; the former was announced in connexion with, and subsequent to, the intimation respecting the Redeemer’s conflict with, and victory over, our adversary the devil; and this connexion is clearly pointed out by the Apostle, Heb. ix. 27, 28, — “It is appointed for men once to die, and after death the judgement;” in exact correspondence with the Divine purpose, that Christ should be “once offered to bear the sins of many, and that unto them that look for him he should appear the second time, without sin unto salvation.” By death he destroyed him that had the power of death, that is the devil; he descended into the lower parts of the earth, and all his brethren must be made conformable to his death. It is the last part of their fellowship with their suffering Redeemer, and “if we suffer with him, we shall also reign with him.” In all things believers are predestinated to be conformed to Christ, and they shall all share in his victory, by having fellowship with him in his resurrection. The dissolution of the human body, so fearfully and wonderfully made, is termed death, because it is the most lively emblem of the second death, —the destruction of soul and body in hell, which is the doom awaiting the seed of the serpent. Natural death consists in the separation of soul and body; spiritual and eternal death, in the separation of both from God.

That the separation of soul and body, although an emblem of death, —a type of the wrath to come, was something very different from the death which Adam incurred, is evident from our Lord’s declarations, — “If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death, —whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die.” Our believing in Christ will not prevent our returning to the dust; but, in regard to the children of God, death is abolished, —its sting is taken away, —it is a harmless monster.

Believers are not under the law, which is the strength of sin; they fall asleep in Jesus, and shall have fellowship with him in his resurrection, when death shall be swallowed up in victory. It is true, the leprous house must be taken down, and cast into an unclean place; those members which we have yielded as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin, must moulder in the dust; but the bodies of the saints shall be refined in the grave, and raised up like the glorious body of Jesus.

CHAPTER XI.

Universal Atonement Inconsistent with the First Intimation of Mercy, and with God’s Dealings with Mankind, Both Before and Since the Appearance of Christ.

NOT only did God, by the division of mankind into two families, plainly show that salvation was to be limited to a part of the human family, but He declared that He would put enmity between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman. They were to be respectively subjects of the kingdoms of darkness and of light, and hence the Lord informed his disciples that they should be hated of all men for his name’s sake; that the world should hate them, because they were not of the world, but chosen out of it; and his Apostle teaches believers not to marvel if the world hate them: “We know,” says he, “that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren.” Christ’s little flock are taught of God to love one another; this love is the law of the house; it is the badge of discipleship. “He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.”

The separation of mankind into two classes was not only foretold, but exhibited in Adam’s sons, Cain and Abel. The former was the seed of the serpent, —he was “of that wicked one the latter was the seed of the women, an heir of promise, justified by faith; and the enmity which God had put between the two families, was manifested by Cain slaying his brother. He was in consequence cursed, driven out from the presence of the Lord, and thus was separated from the family of Seth, the progenitor of Christ. Men attempted to put an end to the separation by intermarriages, and this occasioned the flood, Gen. vi. 2. 3.

Noah, the progenitor of Christ, found grace in the sight of the Lord, and, by Divine direction, prepared an ark for the saving of his house. This was a remarkable type of the great salvation. Noah was saved by grace through faith; the water which overwhelmed the world, bore up the ark, preserving him and his family; so by death, which is the destruction of the wicked, Christ destroyed him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and all his people in consequence of having died in him, shall live and reign with him forever. Hence death is said to be swallowed up of victory.

Very shortly after the flood, the two families into which mankind had been divided, were again brought to view in the curse pronounced on Ham, while Shem and Japhet were blessed. Soon afterwards, Abraham was taken out from his kindred, was constituted the father of Christ and of all believers, and in his family, in the line of Isaac and Jacob, the knowledge of God was maintained, while all other nations were plunged in ignorance and idolatry, and suffered to walk in their own ways. “You only,” says the Lord, “have I known of all the families of the earth,” Amos iii. 2.

The reason of the preference given to Israel was their carnal relation to Christ, in virtue of which they were brought into covenant with God, and blessed with all carnal blessings in earthly places, a shadow for the time then present of the true Israel, who, in virtue of their spiritual relation to the Saviour, 1 Cor. vi. 17, are, by a new and better covenant, “blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ,” Eph. i. 3. Thus all the promises, both carnal and spiritual, are yea and amen in Christ Jesus; and this explains the declaration of the Apostle, — “He saith not to seeds, as of many; but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ,” Gal. iii. 16. Hence of the eight sons of Abraham, only Isaac, the child of promise, and the progenitor of Christ, had part in the covenant which God established with Abraham. The whole history of Israel, according to the flesh, is a parable, the interpretation of which we have in God’s dealings with the true Israel, the children of Abraham by faith, Gal. iii. 26—29.

Thus we see that, in the limitation of the Atonement to the heirs of promise, the Lord only followed out that system of separation which had been coeval with the revelation of his purposes of mercy to sinners of mankind; and, in leaving the far greater part of the human race in darkness and ignorance, he is pursuing the same plan on which he has acted from the beginning. It is true that there is now no preference of any particular family; the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile is broken down, and, — while it was necessary that the Gospel should first be preached to Israel, and that the first fruits of the family in which the Lord condescended to be born should be gathered in, as the pledge of their future restoration,—the commandment is given to preach the Gospel to every creature; and the promise of the Holy Ghost is made, not only to Israel, but “to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call,” Acts ii. 39.

In the history of Israel after the flesh, we see all the great doctrines of the Gospel exhibited, with one exception. At present it seems as if God had cast away his people; but such is not the case. He has, indeed, taken vengeance on their inventions. They rejected Him who is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth; and God has rejected them. But they have not stumbled that they should fall; they are scattered among all nations, yet preserved distinct. They have been God’s witnesses, both while He dwelt with them in their own land, and since He hath scattered them in his wrath; and they shall yet be his witnesses in their restoration. This will complete their testimony; and the great doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, of God’s unchangeable love to his people, will be illustriously displayed, in the vail—which, to this day, remains untaken away, —being removed, so that they shall look on Him whom they have pierced, and mourn; and by the contemplation of the glory of the Lord, in the unvailed face of Jesus, they shall be changed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord.

While the commandment to preach repentance and remission of sins is unlimited, and neither Jew nor Greek is preferred in the kingdom of God, the commandment is modified by the providence of God. Eighteen hundred years after the ascension of Christ, the Gospel has reached but a small portion of the world. Millions are plunged in heathen and Mahometan darkness; and the far greater part of those called Christians have fallen into idolatry, and are trained from infancy to the worship of the Virgin Mary and the saints. Even in those countries most highly favoured, such as our own, where the Scriptures are so widely circulated, and where the Gospel is so generally preached, what multitudes are systematically brought up in the grossest wickedness and ignorance; and even among those who are educated and well-informed, what utter blindness do we meet with respecting the way of salvation!

We have already noticed, that when the incarnation of the Son of God is spoken of, he is represented as taking on him not the seed of Adam, the father of mankind, but of Abraham, the father of God’s peculiar people. We have seen that for two thousand years the knowledge of God was confined to that family, which, by their laws and institutions, was separated from all other families; and even now, when no man is known after the flesh, when the Lord represents himself as not being the God of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles, salvation is entailed upon the family of Abraham; and men of every nation obtain the inheritance, by being grafted, contrary to nature, into the good olive tree. Those who are Christ’s are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. Hence we learn that the new covenant, as well as the old, is made with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, Jer. xxxi. 31; not that it is limited to Israel after the flesh, but all who are brought within its bond become, by faith, the children of Abraham. “We,” says the Apostle, speaking in the name of believers, “are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.”

May we not, then, with confidence appeal to every unprejudiced mind, whether the Atonement, being made exclusively for the seed of the woman,-—or, in other words, for the brethren of Christ, chosen in him before the foundation of the world,—be not more consistent with the first intimation of mercy, with God’s dealings with mankind from the beginning, and with the present state of the world,—than a universal Atonement, which does not prevent the condemnation of the greater part of those for whom it was made, who never had an opportunity of availing themselves of the sacrifice offered upon the cross. It may indeed be said that it is owing to the unfaithfulness and sloth of Christians that the Gospel has not been carried to the uttermost ends of the earth; but whatever may have been the cause, such is the fact; and however we may account for it, we cannot but see that it is very inconsistent with the doctrine of universal Atonement.

CHAPTER XII.

The Perfect Consistency of the General Invitations of the Gospel with the Doctrine of the Atonement Having Been Offered Only for the Church.

THERE is perhaps no argument upon which the advocates of universal Atonement more confidently rely, than the inconsistency of the unlimited invitations of the Gospel with the opposite doctrine.

The opinion that Christ died for the whole human race, has of late been more favourably received by not a few, from the mistaken idea that a limited Atonement is incompatible with the unlimited proclamation of pardon through faith in Jesus. This has, perhaps, been partly owing to some who, holding scriptural views respecting the extent of the Atonement, have founded the general invitations to those who come under the sound of the Gospel, upon the sufficiency of the Atonement for all. To this sentiment we shall afterwards advert. At present, we only observe, that the invitations of the Gospel rest upon the Lord’s express commandment, “Go into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature.” This precept is illustrated by the practice of the Apostles. They were sometimes forbidden to go to particular places; but wherever they went, they addressed men indiscriminately, whether Greeks or Barbarians, whether wise or unwise. In like manner, the sinner’s warrant to trust in Christ for salvation, is not his own speculations about the sufficiency of the Atonement, but the positive assurance that whosoever will, may come, and take of the water of life freely.

The word of God alone is the warrant of our faith; his purpose to save few or many is not the rule of our obedience. The invitations of the Gospel are free as the air we breathe, as the light of heaven; and are to be addressed to all who come under the joyful sound. No qualification is required to entitle us to embrace them; they are clogged with no condition. Not only is the greatest rebel encouraged to come to Christ that he may have life, but he is urged to join in the invitation to his fellow-sinners: “Let him that heareth, say come.” Faith in Jesus is the golden key which opens to our view the secrets of the book of life; if we believe in Christ, —if on the ground of the warrant of the word of God we trust in him for salvation, —we have the assurance of being partakers of eternal life, as much as if we saw our names enrolled among God’s elect.

Dr Wardlaw observes: — “On the point now before us, of the free and universal offer of pardon to sinners of mankind without exception, —the third scheme of Atonement is unembarrassed with any difficulty. We state the case thus, — According to the admitted constitution of the Gospel, in conformity with the revealed principles of God’s moral government, sin cannot be pardoned, except as atoned for. In other words, atonement is necessary to pardon. I cannot see, then, on what other ground we can consistently offer pardon to all, and invite all to the acceptance of it, than the ground of the Atonement made having included all, and the sins of all. According to every other system, there is an immense amount of sin that is unatoned for; and if what has had no atonement made for it, cannot be remitted, with what consistency can we, in the name of God, offer the remission of it? There is a vast multitude of sinners for whom, and for whose sins, no propitiation has been made: —and if ‘without shedding of blood there is no remission,’ and no blood has been shed for them, — what consistency can we invite and urge them to accept the blessing? But on the principle of an indefinite atonement, an atonement ‘for the sins of the whole world,’ the ground of invitation is clear and consistent. On this ground we can, at once and freely, without the slightest feeling of hesitation or embarrassment, say to all whom we can ever be called to address —There is pardon for you. But we could not say so, unless we were able also to say, There is atonement for you. The two declarations must be co-extensive; the one evidently resting upon the other, and deriving from it its truth. We can tell them that there is nothing, either in the limited sufficiency or in the limited destination, of the Atonement, that constitutes the slightest hinderance to their forgiveness; that hinderance there is none save in themselves, —in their indifference, or their aversion, —their ‘evil heart of unbelief.’”[‡‡‡‡‡]

In the first place, it is perfectly true “that sin cannot be pardoned, except as atoned for.” The justice and truth of God forbid the supposition; but the converse is equally true, that sin cannot BUT be pardoned IF atoned for. If sin be not pardoned, it is self-evident, either that no atonement for it has been made, or that it has proved insufficient. If the Atonement “included all, and the sins of all,” the iniquities of all are purged, —are removed as far as the east is from the west. “An indefinite atonement —an atonement for the sins of the whole world,” if the whole world is not saved, is no atonement; it is, as Dr Jenkyn would say, “a complete failure.”

In another passage, Dr Wardlaw inquires, “WHAT IS THE ATONEMENT WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE CHRISTIAN SCHEME, HAS ACTUALLY BEEN MADE? And in answer to this inquiry, the whole Bible bears us out in affirming it to have been Atonement by sacrifice, —in other words, by substitution and vicarious suffering. Of this the Bible is full. To the mind that can contrive, to its own satisfaction, to strip the Bible of the doctrine of Atonement by vicarious suffering, it might, in my apprehension, be safely pronounced impossible to convey a divine discovery at all; there being no terms conceivable that might not, by such a mind, be explained away. SALVATION IS THE LESSON of the Bible: and it is salvation BY ATONEMENT, OR SUBSTITUTIONARY SUFFERING.”[§§§§§]

If Christ made Atonement by sacrifice, those for whom it was offered are whiter than snow; if he were a substitute, it is apparent his substitution must be available for those whose place he occupied; if his sufferings were vicarious, they must have forever perfected those in whose place he stood. He came to do the will of God; “by the which will,” says the Apostle, “we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus once for all.”

Again, we are told that there is no hinderance to men receiving pardon, “save in themselves, —in their indifference or their aversion, —their evil heart of unbelief.” Most true; and this indifference or aversion, if persisted in, demonstrates that they were not redeemed from the curse of the law, — that Christ was not made a curse for them, —that their guilt was not expiated on Calvary; for guilt is the sole cause of men’s depravity and alienation from God, —of “their indifference, or their aversion, —their evil heart of unbelief.” These dispositions could not subsist in an innocent creature; and where guilt is expiated, the creature is innocent.

In the second place, pardon is not offered to all, nor have all an opportunity of profiting by the Atonement; for a comparatively small part of the world have hitherto heard of the name of Jesus. According to Dr Wardlaw, the Atonement “included all, and the sins of all;” yet a small part of the human race enjoy the means of deriving benefit from the Atonement, which, according to his theory, was made for them.

In the third place, we have no warrant to “offer” remission to any individual. We are commanded to proclaim a free and full salvation to the most guilty, through faith in the Lord Jesus, —to tell men that by Him all that believe are justified from all things; that all who hear the Gospel are commanded to rest on him with assured confidence, and to enjoy eternal life, by receiving him as their Almighty Saviour. The Gospel reveals salvation to everyone who believes in Christ, and God’s testimony holds equally true, whether men will hear, or whether they will forbear. '

God has been pleased to appoint that faith should come by hearing; and has commanded the Gospel to be preached to every creature, while in his providence He confines it to those nations and individuals whom He sees fit to distinguish above others. To some it comes in power and demonstration of the Spirit; to others it comes only in word. To the former, it is the power of God unto salvation, it introduces them into the fold of Christ; to the latter, it is a stumbling-block and foolishness. The former are delivered from the power of darkness, and translated into the kingdom of God’s dear Son; they are saved by grace through faith; while the guilt of the latter is aggravated, and their determined enmity against God manifested, by rejecting the counsel of God against themselves; and thus the elect and non-elect are distinguished by the preaching of the Gospel. Those from whom it is hid, are irretrievably lost, for there is but one name given under heaven whereby we can be saved. The faith by which the love of the truth is received, is, in every case, the gift of God, —the fruit of the Spirit flowing to Christ’s flock through the Atonement made for them on Calvary, and thus “their indifference, or their aversion, —their evil heart of unbelief,” is removed.

The Gospel tells no man that an Atonement was made for his sins; it informs us that “there is an immense amount of sin that is unatoned for,” that there are many to whom the Lord will say, “I never knew you; ye are not of my sheep.” We are taught that the whole world, with the exception of Christ’s little flock, lieth in the wicked one, —that the road which leadeth to destruction is broad; but all who hear the Gospel are invited to enter the strait gate, by looking to Jesus for mercy, and calling upon the name of the Lord. Now, what ground is there for supposing that the “Atonement made, included all, and the sins of all?” The Apostle speaks of those for whom Christ died being justified by his blood, and saved from wrath through him; being reconciled to God by the death of his Son, and “much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.” We cannot say to any man, you are pardoned; but we can say to every man, “by HIM all who believe are justified from all things,” and, let who will reject the Gospel, God abideth faithful. The calls and invitations of the Gospel shall fulfil God’s purpose, in gathering in all for whose sins atonement was made. They are known to Him, they are his hidden ones, and are manifested by receiving the love of the truth. “All things,” says the Apostle, “are for your sakes, whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas,” and again, “I endure all things for the elect’s sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.” God’s word shall not return to him void; it shall accomplish what He pleaseth, and prosper in the thing whereto He sent it; while it demonstrates the malignity of sin in the rejection of mercy through the Saviour, by all who were not given to Christ, with whom he did not take part in flesh and blood; for whose sake he did not sanctify himself that they might be sanctified through the truth; in short, by all who, not being the objects of God’s everlasting love, were not chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, that they might be holy, and without blame before Him in love.

Dr Wardlaw speaks of the universal and free invitation “to the acceptance of an offered pardon, whilst yet, for a large proportion of those so invited, there is no pardon possible, in consequence of there being no Atonement,” as being “incapable of reconciliation,” and involving a “palpable contradiction.” Now, since he admits that none ever were or shall be saved, except by the sovereign application of the Atonement, —that the work of the Spirit is as necessary to salvation as the work of Christ, — that nothing short of the Spirit’s power “can effectually overcome that enmity,—that aversion of heart, that rebellion of will,” in which human inability consists;—what difficulty, we ask, is got rid of, by asserting that “the Atonement included all, and the sins of all,” when that Almighty power, which is as necessary to salvation as the Atonement, is withheld? Without Atonement, there can be no salvation; the work of the Sprit, which is bestowed only upon the elect, is equally necessary, and therefore if the one be a palpable contradiction, what shall we say of the other? The difference, says Dr Wardlaw, lies in this, —the one is a natural, the other only a moral impossibility; but, by his own admission, the one is as ab-solute as the other. He admits that none could by possibility have been saved without the Atonement; and, since the work of the Spirit is “as necessary,” without his power, salvation is equally impossible.

Dr Wardlaw may still adhere to the scriptural doctrine of election, and the absolute necessity of the work of the Spirit to conversion; but it does not require the spirit of prophecy to foretell that the next and almost inevitable step in the downward progress of those who have of late adopted the chimera of universal Atonement, will be the denial of God’s absolute sovereignty in the bestowment of salvation, and quickening those who are dead in trespasses and sins. Strong symptoms of this are already appearing, to which we shall afterwards direct our attention.

I give Dr Wardlaw credit for holding the doctrine of election; but, on this point, he resembles a tree from whose roots the soil is, to a considerable degree, washed away by the stream. The doctrine of election does not well comport with universal Atonement, and the following quotation proves, if we mistake not, that his views on this subject do not correspond with the doctrine of the word of God. “The Gospel,” he tells us, “may be preached, and preached in all its fulness, —nay, we must say, ought to be so preached, —without a word being said about election.” —p. 181. This is a bold assertion in the face of our Lord’s repeated declarations when addressing unbelievers, that all who were given to him by the Father shall come to him, —that no man can come to him except the Father draw him, —and that men believe not, because they are not of his sheep. The Scripture exhibits the character of God, and the relation in which fallen man stands to his Maker; but, according to Dr Wardlaw, this part of truth (for he admits election to be truth) should be kept out of view. “Any statement of that doctrine,” he says, “is not at all necessary to the full exhibition of the Gospel as a proclamation of the Divine satisfaction in the finished work of Jesus, and of the ground, and the offer of pardon and salvation to sinners of mankind, without exception. In point of fact, the recorded specimens of apostolic preaching contain nothing of the doctrine of election.”

When addressing the Jews on the day of Pentecost, Peter told them that what they had done was according to the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, Acts ii. 23, iii. 18, and iv. 27, 28. The Jews might easily have wrested his words; and so may men wrest the doctrine of election. But whatever canons may be laid down by divines as to the proper method of preaching the Gospel, it is well for us to be guided by the example of the Lord and his inspired Apostles, and by manifestation of the truth to commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. Man’s utterly ruined state is most fully exhibited in the doctrine of election. Not only is he incapable of saving himself, but when a free salvation is preached to him, he continues to spurn it, till it is brought home to his heart with Divine power and energy. Here, then, we have the fullest exhibition of the awful state and circumstances of fallen man; and should it be concealed from those whom we address? Shall we hide from them their true situation, in the hope of beguiling them into the faith of Christ? Shall we be afraid to tell them how absolutely dependent they are upon Him who made them? “No,” says the Apostle, “we have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness; not handling the word of God deceitfully.” Dr Wardlaw admits, that, had there been no election, there would have been no salvation. This doctrine shuts men up to absolute dependence on God’s mercy. The Gospel is a two-edged sword; it may either be received in love, or wrested to men’s destruction. Not only election, but every other doctrine of the Gospel, may be perverted. Men may say, “Let us sin that grace may abound; nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord knoweth them that are his, and let everyone that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.”

Still, it is said, that unless the sinner know he has been redeemed, or that atonement has been made for him, he can have no assurance that his sins are forgiven; and what assurance, may we ask, can he receive from the universality of the Atonement, since its advocates admit that it gives no security of salvation? Many of the human race perish, notwithstanding this universality. It is a truth, firm as the throne of the Almighty, that he who believeth shall be saved; no stronger evidence of any thing can be given than the promise and oath of God. “He that believeth hath the witness in himself;” the joy of faith, the contemplation of his security in the arms of an almighty Saviour, casteth out fear, and leads the believer to triumph in the God of his salvation. It is true, that since Christ did not die for all mankind, all shall not be saved; but it is equally true, that the reason why all are not saved, is that all have not faith. Had it been given to every individual of the human race to believe in Christ, not one would have perished. None who trust in Christ shall be lost through the insufficiency of the Atonement. The rejection of Christ’s salvation, from the love of darkness and hatred of the light, will be the ground, of the condemnation of all who have heard and rejected the Gospel. None who come to Jesus shall be cast out, because no provision was made for their salvation. There is no child of the human family who believes the Gospel, however aggravated his guilt, for whose salvation, through the blood of Atonement, the veracity of God is not pledged.

The notion, that the universal proclamation of pardon can only be made on the supposition that Christ died for all, proceeds from a false view of what we are commanded to believe. The Scripture does not tell us that Christ died for any particular individual, therefore no man is required, in the first instance, to believe that Christ died for him. The proclamation, that whosoever believes in Christ shall be saved, is true, whether we believe it or not. If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful; he cannot deny himself. The truth which we are commanded to believe, cannot be affected by the reception which it experiences. The Gospel announces that Christ came into the world to save sinners; it says to all and to each individual who hears it, “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.” It proclaims a free pardon to all who will receive it through faith in the blood of Christ; it opens a new and living way, by which the vilest sinner may draw near to God with the full assurance of acceptance. It reveals the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ seated upon a throne of grace, and all who approach in the way which he hath consecrated, shall stand unrebukable before Him who cannot look upon sin. No discretion is given us in preaching the Gospel; we are not entitled to preach it to some, and withhold it from others. It is to be addressed to all. Its language is, — “To you, O men, I call, and my voice is to the sons of men.” “Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God,” “a just God and a Saviour.” The Gospel is Christ’s voice, by which his blood-bought sheep are conducted into his fold, and are thus separated from the goats. It is the rod of his power, by which he guides his flock, while to others it is a stumbling-block and foolishness. “I know my sheep,” says the Lord Jesus, and, by the means of the Gospel, they are made to know him. Hence the Apostle, says, “After that ye have known God,” or rather are known of God, Gal. iv. 9. He, as it were, corrects himself, and teaches us that our knowledge of God is the consequence of his having known us. To the same purpose, he says, “I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus,” Philip, iii. 12. Thus we are plainly taught that our knowledge of Christ, and our apprehension of his salvation, is the effect of his having known and apprehended us.

We are taught, to lay the Gospel before our fellow men, not as if we were indifferent whether they received it or not, but to urge it on their acceptance. We see how tenderly and affectionately the Lord addressed the lost sheep of the house of Israel during his personal ministry, and how the Apostles besought men to be reconciled to God. And, although many, both Jews and Gentiles, rejected the counsel of God against themselves, by these means the elect were gathered in, and obtained salvation, while the rest were blinded, Acts xiii. 48; Rom. xi. 7; 2 Tim. ii. 10.

The faith of Jesus is not the persuasion that we are of the elect, or that our sins are pardoned. Neither of these can be ascertained previous to our believing. We are exhorted to make our calling and election sure. The latter can only be ascertained by the former. We are never required to believe anything but what is true, independently of our belief. The Gospel declares that, whatever our character may be, Christ stands with open arms to receive us. Independently, therefore, of any qualification, we are encouraged at once to take shelter under the shadow of his wings, —to trust in him for pardon of the past, and to have confidence in him, that sin shall not in future have dominion over us. This is the beginning of the Christian’s confidence; this is his consolation when he enters upon his pilgrimage, and this supports him when he walks through the valley of the shadow of death. The ground of faith, then, is not the extent of the Atonement; it is the promise of pardon and eternal life through Jesus to all who believe, without distinction and without exception. Those for whom Christ did not lay down his life, if they come under the sound of the Gospel, have the same warrant to believe as those whose sins were expiated on Calvary, whose names were written in the Lamb's book of life, and to whom, in the person of their great Head and Representative, God, who cannot lie, promised eternal life before the world began.

Dr Wardlaw inquires, “Are the elect in a state of salvation previously to the grace of God applying the Atonement? Are they not, on the contrary, described as being, before that time, children of wrath, even as others?” The elect were chosen in Christ from everlasting, and eternal life was secured to them by the promise of God, before the world was, Tit. i. 2. It is true, they were nature the children of wrath. Considered in their relation to Adam, they were as guilty, and as much condemned as others; but they were the objects of God’s everlasting love. “Thine they were,” says the Saviour, “and thou gavest them me,” John xvii. 6. In virtue of their election in Christ, their Covenant Head, they were ransomed from death by his blood. They are said to have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, Eph. i. 7. They are brought nigh by the blood of Christ, Eph. ii. 13. He is their peace, having made peace by the blood of his cross. In short, in their redemption from the curse of the law, by his being made a curse for them, every spiritual, and heavenly, and eternal blessing, is secured to the elect. He bore their sins in his own body on the tree.

We are ever to distinguish between the revealed will of God and his secret purpose. It is his revealed will that salvation should be preached to all who are brought under the sound of the Gospel; but it is his purpose to save those only whom He has chosen in Christ. This may appear a hard saying, but the same difficulty attaches to the system of those who hold universal Atonement, and at the same time admit the doctrine of election. They tell us Christ died for all, and therefore the Gospel is to be preached to all; but they acknowledge that it is only given to a certain number to believe in the Saviour. They admit that, while God beseeches men to be reconciled, He at the same time gives the Spirit— “which is as necessary” to salvation “as the work of Christ,”—only to those whom He has foreordained to eternal life. How, then, can they charge inconsistency on those who maintain that Christ purchased the Church—and the Church alone—with his own blood? Both acknowledge that the invitations of the Gospel are addressed to all, in the most unlimited degree; both hold that it is not the purpose of God that all should be saved. The one side maintains that only those for whom the Redeemer stood as surety will listen to the voice of mercy; while the other asserts, that although the redemption of all has been purchased, and the sins of all expiated, Divine sovereignty restricts salvation to a few. Thus we see that universal Atonement removes no difficulty; it still leaves the objection unanswered, —why the Gospel is commanded to be preached to the whole world, while Divine sovereignty restricts the benefit to a limited number, bestowing only upon some grace to believe, although the Son of God bore the sins of all in his own body upon the tree; notwithstanding which, the greater part of mankind neither become dead to sin, nor live unto righteousness. Those, on the contrary, who hold particular redemption, maintain that the Gospel is to be preached to all, and that by it the Lord gathers into His fold the sheep whom He purchased with His blood.

The objection, that there can be no bona fide invitation to sinners to receive pardon through faith in Christ, unless Atonement has been made for all, is founded on a variety of errors in regard to the Gospel.

In the first place, it proceeds on the erroneous supposition that God commands sinners to believe that an Atonement has been made for their sins. Now, we have seen that the Gospel merely invites sinners to trust in Christ, with the assurance that in doing so they shall be saved. Men are never called in the first instance to believe that they are saved, or that they are of the number of the elect, or that an Atonement has been made for their sins. The Gospel merely reveals the sacrifice offered upon the cross, with the assurance that reliance upon it is inseparably connected with salvation. This is a truth entirely independent of the extent of the Atonement. God has established an indissoluble connexion between faith in Jesus and salvation, and nothing can put asunder what He hath joined. The Gospel is the touchstone by which the elect are distinguished from those who die in their sins. Those for whom no Atonement was made, who are not of Christ’s sheep, for whom the good Shepherd did not lay down his life, do not receive him as their Saviour; in other words, are not made partakers of precious faith: but his sheep hear his voice, he knows them, they follow him, and he gives them eternal life. Hence the Apostle says, “Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God. For our Gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance,” 1 Thess. i. 4, 5. The Gospel is addressed indiscriminately to all who come under its sound; to the non-elect it comes in word, to the elect in power. The former, like the deaf adder, stop their ears, and will not listen to the voice of the charmer; the latter set to their seal that God is true, by trusting in the blood of Atonement.

In the second place, the objection proceeds upon the assumption that there is a possibility of the gifts of God being separated. Christ is God’s unspeakable gift. Now, the supposition that this gift was bestowed on all, while the secondary, and consequently inferior gifts of faith, repentance, pardon, and salvation, are withheld, is utterly unscriptural. This is decided by the question, “He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?” The Atonement removes the apparently impassable barrier which sin has interposed between a just and holy God and fallen man; it opens a channel through which grace, mercy, and peace, flow to all for whose transgressions Christ was smitten. Guilt alone prevents the love of God from flowing to any of his intelligent creatures; and those whose guilt was expiated by the Atonement, receive through their Surety, Substitute, and Covenant-head, the Holy Spirit in all his quickening and enlightening influence.

In the third place, the objection evinces a very erroneous view of the state into which man has been brought by the fall. He is under the curse, —dead in sins. His inability to turn to God is, doubtless, a moral inability; but it is not, on this account, a whit less absolute. This is evident, not only from the repeated declarations of the Word of God, but from faith being represented as his gift. What avails an Atonement if it have not removed the curse by which the sinner is cut off from God, the Fountain of purity and holiness. If no good thing dwell in him, (Rom. vii. 18,) how is it possible he should believe, or do anything pleasing to God? In such circumstances, he can no more believe than he can keep the whole law. So long as he is under the curse, faith is impossible; but all for whom the Atonement was made are redeemed from the curse, and, as the necessary consequence, are made willing in a day of power, and without fail, inherit a blessing. Dr Wardlaw admits that the work of the Spirit is as necessary to salvation as the work of Christ, consequently, the bestowment of the one brings no one nearer to eternal life, if the other be withheld. What would it avail the prisoner in a dungeon to have an ample supply of victuals, if he were incapable of swallowing? Death must be the consequence. “True,” says Dr Wardlaw, “and death will infallibly be the lot of all who are not of the number of the elect, notwithstanding the Atonement by sacrifice;” — “in other words, by substitution and vicarious sufferings that sacrifice, substitution, and vicarious suffering, are empty names, except to the elect.

In the fourth place, the objection assumes that God is such an one as ourselves. If a person invite an unlimited number of guests to a feast, he might be accused of deceit, because he could not know whether more might not come than those for whom he had made provision. Now, the objection implies the possibility of sinners listening to the invitations of mercy, without God revealing his Son in them. Since it is admitted that the work of the Spirit is as necessary as the work of Christ, —that those only whom the Father draws will come to Christ, —where is the difficulty of reconciling the universality of the invitations with the veracity of God? It is granted that only a certain number have been elected to eternal life, and that they alone shall be saved. If the doctrine of election do not interfere with the universal proclamation of pardon through faith in Jesus, why should we feel any difficulty in admitting that, while Christ has atoned only for the sins of his chosen people, the Gospel should be preached to all mankind to whom we have access? If we knew for whom the Atonement was made, or who are the elect, it would be idle to preach to any others; but this is a secret thing, which belongs to God. He has told us that faith cometh by hearing, and commanded us in the morning to sow our seed, and in the evening not to withhold our hand, for we know not which shall prosper, whether this or that, or whether they may not be both alike profitable. To give the increase is His exclusive prerogative.

In replying to the only objection that ever was, or can be made, to the doctrine of personal election, the Apostle says, “What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: and that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory; even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?” Rom. ix. 22—24. May we not, then, reply to the charge of inconsistency of limited Atonement and general invitation. What if God, —willing to place in the strongest light the fatal consequences of disobedience, the utter alienation of fallen man from his Creator, and the mighty power put forth in the salvation of his people, —has commanded a free and full salvation, through faith in his incarnate and crucified Son, to be preached to sinners of mankind? Yet such is their determined enmity against God, that not one will hearken, except the message be accompanied with the irresistible power of his Holy Spirit, by which sinners are created anew in Christ Jesus, and which he bestows according to his sovereign pleasure. Arminians may object to this, but it is passing strange that those who hold the doctrine of election, should find any difficulty in acceding to this statement.

On the whole, while we have no wish “unnecessarily to aggravate and extend” the difference between those who hold a universal and a limited Atonement, we consider it to be most important, and calculated to affect our views of every part of divine truth. At the same time, we agree with Dr Wardlaw in regard to the impropriety of the “hasty use” of “strong condemnatory expressions,” but we cannot subscribe to his rule, that we are never to charge a man with “preaching another Gospel, unless we are prepared, with deliberate solemnity, to add, as Paul does here, ‘Let him be accursed,’” —p. 194. It appears to us perfectly lawful and proper to point out any perversion of the Gospel, and to show how it subverts the truth, while we do not presume to judge another man’s servant, more especially as to his state before God.

“There is another danger, too,” says Dr Wardlaw. “which requires to be carefully guarded against; —the danger, I mean, of imputing such consequences as we think we can show to arise, legitimately and unavoidably, from a particular doctrine, or a view of doctrine, to all by whom that doctrine, or that view of it, is held. The consequences may, on our part, be fairly deduced. It may be both right and important to show that they are; but the supporters of the doctrine might not see them before, and may not see them yet, to be legitimate deductions; and if they did, would repudiate them as decidedly as we do ourselves, and abandon, on their account, that which leads to them. We may marvel that they do not; but still, while we wonder at their obtuseness of vision, as it may seem to us, we must beware of ascribing to them what they do not hold, —of laying to their charge what they distinctly and solemnly disown,”— p. 195. This appears to us a very false principle. It is directly opposed to the conduct of the Apostle at Corinth. Some said there was no resurrection; the Apostle showed that this involved the denial of the resurrection of Christ, and, consequently, of the truth of the Gospel, which does not appear to have been the intention of those whom he was opposing; but it was a legitimate deduction from their sentiments, although they might not have perceived it. One of the most effectual methods of combating a false principle is, to point out its consequences; and the example before us fully sanctions this mode of proceeding.

Before concluding this chapter, it may not be improper to make some observations on the term OFFER, which is almost universally employed, both by the advocates of particular and universal redemption. It is not, however, a Scripture expression; and, while we have no wish to contend about words, it is to be feared that it tends to lead many into error.

Much was formerly said of the offer, which was considered a right possessed by regularly appointed ministers of the Gospel. Only such were considered as entitled to make what was termed the ministerial offer of salvation to their fellowmen. It was a species of evangelical Puseyism, arising from the notion of ministers being successors of the Apostles, who were sent forth as the ambassadors of Christ. But, from the nature of their office, the Apostles could have no successors. They have published the Gospel to the world, — they have delivered the laws of the Redeemer’s kingdom, and, being dead, they yet speak in the Scriptures. They are represented as sitting upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Their names are inscribed upon the twelve foundations of the city of God, (Rev. xxi. 14,) whose gates they have thrown open. Their language still is, “He that is of God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us.” “If any man think himself a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things I write are the commandments of God; but if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.” All that we have to do, is to repeat the testimony of the Apostles. It is their doctrine with which the Lord has promised that He will be present to the end of the world. No discretionary power is given to any man, whatever title he may assume, to add to, or diminish aught from, the apostolic testimony. What saith the Scripture? “How readest thou?” is our infallible guide in addressing our fellow-men, from which none are entitled to deviate.[******]

It has always appeared to us that a degree of self-importance attaches to the words of a man offering the Gospel to his fellow-sinners. It seems as if it were committed to his keeping, and in some measure dependent on his discretion. Such is not the case; it was committed to the Apostles, who were secured from error by the power of the Holy Ghost, and who were consequently enabled to say, “He that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error,” 1 John iv. 6. Their Gospel is recorded in the word of God, which endureth forever, by which we shall all be judged.

CHAPTER XIII.

On the Sufficiency of the Sacrifice of Christ for all Mankind.

WITH regard to the infinite value of the sacrifice of Christ considered in itself, there is no dispute. Had it pleased God that all mankind should be saved, no more suffering than Christ endured, would have been necessary; and had it been the Divine purpose that but one solitary individual of Adam’s race should obtain salvation, there would have been no abatement of what Jesus endured upon earth. In either case, the demands of justice must have been satisfied, —the curse denounced against sin must have been borne, —the wages of sin must have been paid by the death of the substitute, whether of the individual or of the countless millions of Adam’s race, according to the irrevocable sentence which had proceeded from His mouth, with whom there is no variableness, or shadow of turning.

We have observed, that some who hold scriptural views in regard to the extent of the Atonement, represent the general invitations of the Gospel as being founded upon the sufficiency of the sacrifice offered upon the cross for all mankind. This is a subject, however, on which the Scripture is silent. It represents the Atonement as being amply sufficient for all who come to the Saviour, however aggravated their guilt; but it never speaks of an indefinite sufficiency in the Atonement, as an inducement to sinners to rest on it for salvation. God is uniformly represented as having a specific purpose in the gift of his Son. An innumerable multitude were given by the Father to the Son in the everlasting council; he accepted the gift, and in the fulness of time said, “Lo, I come to do thy will, O God,”— “by the which will,” says his Apostle, “we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Christ once for all,” Heb. x. 9, 10.

Men are constantly prone to err on the right hand or on the left. While one class who profess the truth have, in order to simplify the Gospel, represented the Atonement as having been offered for those that are lost, as well as for the saved; another class, —who possess much acquaintance with the truth, and who know that the good Shepherd laid down his life only for his sheep, —object to address the Gospel to men indiscriminately. They justly hold, that the Atonement was made exclusively for the Church, and from this they infer, that there is no ground for preaching salvation indiscriminately, and beseeching men to be reconciled to God. The error on both sides springs from the same source, viz. resting the proclamation of salvation upon our speculations as to the sufficiency of the Atonement, and not being satisfied with the positive commandment to preach the Gospel to every creature, illustrated by the example of the first ministers of the Word.

Dr Wardlaw divides the theories on the subject of the Atonement into three classes. The first he terms “the theory of exact equivalent,” which represents the “expiatory sufferings of the Redeemer as possessing just as much atoning virtue, neither less nor more, as was equivalent for the merited punishment of all who shall be benefited by it,” which he justly rejects as derogatory to the dignity of the mediatorial substitute. Upon this we simply remark, that if the sufferings of Christ were expiatory, they must have expiated the guilt of those whose “substitute” he had be-come. The second scheme he terms the theory of “infinite sufficiency, but definite intention or limited destination.” The third, that of “indefinite or universal Atonement, with gracious sovereignty, in its effectual application.” The latter scheme he adopts and defends.

It is remarkable that so much stress should be laid on the indefinite sufficiency of the Atonement, —a question upon which the Scriptures never enter. We have already seen that the word of God furnishes us with a simple ground for preaching the Gospel to every creature, namely, his own commandment, illustrated by the example of the inspired Apostles. With such a warrant, it is surely altogether superfluous to dispute upon what principle the commandment rests. We are taught to walk by faith; “the commandment is a lamp, and the law is light.”

The Atonement, as exhibited in Scripture, had a specific object, —to “gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad,” John xi. 52. This design shall be accomplished; not one of the “seed of the woman” shall be absent; not one of the “seed of the serpent” “shall stand in the judgement” on the great day. All Christ’s “beautiful flock” shall be delivered in full tale to his Father when in the midst of the great congregation he shall say, “Behold I and the children whom thou hast given me.” They are all the purchase of his blood, Acts xx. 28, and shall be the trophies of that power which is given him over all flesh, that he might give eternal life to as many as were chosen in him before the foundation of the world, that they might be holy and without blame before him in love.

When we consider the dignity of the Redeemer’s person, it may be asked, Was not his Atonement of infinite value? and if so, Why might not all mankind have been saved by it? We answer, such was not the will of God; He had a special end in view, and this shall be fully accomplished. But does it, in the smallest degree, derogate from the glory of the Redeemer that his Atonement extended no farther than the commission which he received when he became the Father’s servant, and undertook to redeem all the children given him from death, and to ransom them from the power of the grave?

It may be asked, would greater sufferings have been needed had the number of Christ’s sheep been greater? We may also inquire, had it been intended that the Lord should work double the number of miracles, would it have been necessary that his power should be increased? Certainly not; he received the Holy Spirit without measure, and by the power of the Spirit he performed those mighty works which the Father had given him to do; and, had his commission extended to the healing of all the sick in Syria and the neighbouring nations, or to preventing any death from taking place in Israel or throughout the world during his personal ministry, who can doubt but the power he possessed was amply sufficient? But he had no such commission; he was not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel; and the Son could do nothing of himself; he was entirely guided by his Father’s will, both in regard to those whom he restored to health or raised from the dead, and to those whose sins he bore in his own body on the tree.

CHAPTER XIV.

Inconsistency of Universal Atonement with the Doctrine of the Substitution and Suretiship of Christ.

DR WARDLAW admits that “the Bible is full” of substitution and vicarious suffering, —that “SALVATION IS THE LESSON of the Bible, and it is salvation BY ATONEMENT, or SUBSTITUTIONARY SUFFERING:”[††††††] but his system does not appear to require it; at all events, he makes no practical use of the doctrine of substitution. On the contrary, he informs us “there can be nothing in the nature or essence of the Atonement for one more than for another.” This is utterly subversive of the fundamental doctrine of Scripture in regard to the substitution of Christ, unless we embrace the system of universal salvation, to which the doctrine of universal Atonement naturally leads, especially when taken in connexion with God’s alleged love to all mankind. If Christ stood as the Substitute and Representative of every individual of the human race, the conclusion is inevitable, either that all mankind must be saved, or that he has not accomplished what he undertook, and will never see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied. It is vain to allege that the failure does not lie with God, who has provided Atonement for all; while comparatively few of the human race ever hear of the Atonement, and, consequently, have no opportunity of either receiving or rejecting it: and, in regard to others, Dr Wardlaw admits that the work of the Spirit is as essential to salvation as the work of Christ.

Thus, Dr Wardlaw’s system is founded upon most erroneous views of the substitutionary character of the Redeemer’s sufferings. If Christ substituted himself in the place of all, then the curse which he endured is that which lay upon all; and if the curse has been endured by the Substitute of all, how can it again fall upon any of the human race? It may be said that those who perish refused to take the benefit of the universal Atonement. In the first place, as has been repeatedly noticed, only a remnant of mankind ever heard of the Atonement; and, therefore, could not refuse to avail themselves of the benefit. In the second place, such a mode of reasoning argues very defective views of the effects of the fall. Man is the servant of sin; he is holden in the cords of his sins; condemned already; slain by the word of God’s month; dead in trespasses and sins; incapable of receiving the things of the Spirit of God, which are foolishness to him. Hence the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. Christ, as the Substitute of his people, hath redeemed them to God, from whom they were cut off by the curse of the broken law; and since guilt alone prevents the love of God from flowing to his creatures, their redemption is inseparably connected with their receiving the Spirit, by whom faith, repentance, and every other saving grace, is imparted. The curse, by which they were separated from God, having been endured by their great Substitute on Calvary, it is now perfectly consistent with His character, who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, and who cannot look upon sin, or have fellowship with darkness, to bestow on them every spiritual and heavenly blessing. And not only so, but the glory which redounded to God in the highest, by the substitution of the Surety of the everlasting covenant, fully entitled Jehovah’s righteous Servant, in the nature in which he had endured such deep humiliation, to partake of the glory which he had with the Father before the world was; and it is his will that all his people should behold his glory; and, in virtue of their unity with him, they shall also share it.

It is revolting to common sense, to suppose that Christ was the Substitute of all, if their sins were not laid upon him. Under the righteous government of God, there can be no suffering without guilt. For whose sins was the Redeemer made a curse? He had no sin of his own, and therefore it must have been for the sins of all mankind, or for those of his chosen people. The notion of his being a curse for sin in the abstract, is a metaphysical refinement which cannot bear examination.[‡‡‡‡‡‡] If Christ were the Substitute for all, then all must be saved. If the curse, which alone excludes any of God’s intelligent creatures from His favour, be removed, why do not the streams of grace and purity flow into the hearts of all? What kind of substitution is that of Christ, if those for whom he stood as their vicarious Head, remain, after all his sufferings, under the guilt, and consequently under the dominion of sin?

If the Atonement were sufficient, it cannot be consistent with justice to punish the offender, by whose substitute this atonement was made. If Christ were the Substitute of all mankind, —if he bore their sins in his own body on the tree, that they, being dead to sin, might live unto righteousness, then are they either become dead to the law by the body of Christ, and therefore must be saved, or the penalty must be twice inflicted. Thus it appears that the doctrine of the universality of the Atonement sets aside Christ’s vicarious and substitutionary sufferings, of which, according to Dr Wardlaw, “the Bible is full.” Strange, that a writer on the Atonement should commence with a full admission of the substitution of Christ, while his whole system is directly opposed to this fundamental truth!

The whole sacrificial system proceeds upon the principle of substitution. Why did God respect Abel’s offering, while he disregarded that of Cain? Because the former offered the firstlings of his flock on God’s altar, thus confessing that, as a sinner, he merited death, and looked for mercy through the blood-shedding of Him that was to come; while the latter made no account of his guilt, but presented what would have been a reasonable service for an innocent creature.

Why was there no remission in Israel without shedding of blood? Because the wages of sin is death; and in the kingdom of Israel, spiritual and heavenly things were shadowed forth by those which were carnal and earthly. The blood of bulls and goats could not take away sin; it only sanctified to the purifying of the flesh. In almost every instance the offerings were made only for the transgressions of the ceremonial law. God had no pleasure in burnt-offerings for the breach of the moral law, Psa. li. 16, Heb. x. 6. Had a sacrifice been appointed for murder or adultery, it must either have suspended the penalty of death attached by the law to these crimes, or given a false view of the sacrifice which it prefigured, representing it as insufficient to remove guilt of the deepest dye, since the offender endured the penalty, although blood had been shed for him, and a victim had been substituted in his place upon God’s altar. This, however, would have suited the views of the advocates of universal Atonement; for, according to their system, the sacrifice of Christ does not prevent the infliction of the penalty on the far greater part of those for whom he endured his “SUBSTITUTIONARY SUFFERING.”

All the sacrifices of Israel kept the doctrine of substitution before them. Although they were God’s chosen people, they were sinners as well as the Egyptians; and when the destroying angel passed through the land, the paschal-lamb was substituted in place of the first-born of the family upon whose door-posts its blood was sprinkled. The lamb of the morning, and the lamb of the evening, offered up on the altar, kept the doctrine of substitution constantly before the people. It taught them that it was of the Lord’s mercy they were not consumed, and that they must look for this mercy through the shedding of blood. On the great day of atonement, the goat for the sin-offering was slain, and his blood was sprinkled on the mercy-seat. Aaron then laid his hands upon the head of the scape-goat, confessing over it all the iniquities of the children of Israel,[§§§§§§] and then sent it away into the wilderness. Here, as in other cases, —such as the cleansing of the leper, when two birds were necessary, —the two goats represent the dying and risen Saviour. As the sins of Israel were laid upon the scape-goat, so were the sins of the true Israel laid upon Jesus, Isa. liii. 6. He was stricken for the transgressions of God’s people, and with his stripes they are healed, Isa. liii. 5, 8. This was darkly shadowed forth by all the sacrifices in Israel, where the guilt of the transgressor was, in a figure, transferred to an innocent victim, while the insufficiency of the offerings was manifested by their constant repetition.

Now, if Christ suffered as a substitute, how is it possible that he could have stood in the place of all mankind, and yet that the greater part of the world should never hear the Gospel, and therefore could not possibly believe it, for faith cometh by hearing; and not only so, but comparatively few who hear it receive the report? The limited extent of the proclamation of pardon through the blood of Jesus, is much to be deplored. It has arisen from the Gospel being corrupted, and the Church driven into the wilderness; it is a cause of deep humiliation to believers, but it powerfully vindicates that most important part of the truth of God at present so much controverted; for it demonstrates that Christ did not lay down his life for all mankind, but for those to whom he gives repentance unto life, and to whom his intercession is limited. Indeed, it is evident that the offering and intercession must be of equal extent; they are component and inseparable parts of the priestly office, and it is consequently given as the reason of Christ’s ability to save to the uttermost them that come unto God by him, that he ever liveth to make intercession for them, Heb. vii. 25. The object of his mission was to gather together in one the children of God who are scattered abroad; and the Gospel is the rod of his power, by which this object is accomplished. He must bring in his sheep, and they shall hear his voice, and be gathered into his fold, John x. 16.

Christ is not only the Substitute, but the Surety of his people. The Gospel is founded on the fact that Adam and Christ are the covenant heads and representatives of their respective families. Hence they are termed the first and second man, as if there had been none other but themselves, for the children of each were entirely dependent on their head. In Adam all die; in Christ all are made alive. The first all includes every individual of mankind, the last all is explained by the Apostle, to mean “they that are Christ’s.” The first Adam was the head of the natural creation, of those who are born of the flesh; the second Adam is the head of the new creation, of those that are born of the Spirit; with whom, in the fulness of time, he took part in flesh and blood, being born of a woman, and, as their elder Brother, receiving the Spirit without measure, that, through his humiliation, and death, and resurrection, he might quicken them, and bestow upon them a life which shall never end. To the rest of the human race he will say, “Depart from me; I never knew you.” To many of them the Gospel came in word, “but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.” They were the seed of the serpent, of their father the devil, the god of this world, who blinded their minds to their destruction.

All mankind are, by nature, the children of wrath, and consequently under the bondage of sin. Such is our connection, our union with Adam, that his sin is ours in all its aggravations, as well as in its consequences. All inherit from their first father a corrupt nature, and the seed of every sinful propensity, which grows with their growth, and strengthens with their strength; and, in exact correspondence with this, all whom Christ represented, whose Substitute and Surety he became, are justified and made partakers of a Divine nature, and of all the blessings which flow from his vicarious obedience and sufferings, such as faith, repentance, love, joy, peace, and all the other fruits of the Spirit. It would destroy the beautiful harmony between Adam and Christ, so much insisted on in the word of God, if all whom Adam represented, without exception, were involved in his guilt and condemnation, while the greater part of those, whose Substitute Christ became, did not partake of his righteousness, justification, and life. In this case, there would be no analogy between the head of the natural and of the spiritual creation.

In the wisdom of God, a kingdom was established, of which the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were the subjects; and, in the ordinances prescribed for their observance, as well as in their history, (the whole of which was a figure for the time then present, “a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after,” Heb. iii. 5,) were shadowed forth the privileges which the true Israel were to enjoy in the kingdom of God. Among these ordinances, none was more important than the priesthood, which was limited to the family of Aaron, upon which the continuance of the law depended, Heb. vii. 12. Had that family become extinct, no sacrifice could have been offered in Israel, —no incense could have been burned. In short, all intercourse between God and Israel would have been at an end; for the people were excluded from the holy places, and could only draw near through the priest, who was, therefore, the surety of the covenant. As the legal priesthood was not appointed for all mankind, but for Israel, so the benefits of Christ’s priesthood extend only to the children of the better covenant of which he is the “Surety,” Heb. vii. 22. Through his sacrifice their sins are blotted out; for their sakes he sanctified himself, that they might be sanctified through the truth; for them he ever liveth to make intercession; for them he is preparing mansions in his Father’s house; and, in due time he will raise them from the dead, and present them to himself a glorious church, without spot or wrinkle, or any such thing. The exceeding great and precious promises upon which God hath caused them to hope, are all yea and amen in Christ; they see them all fulfilled in the triumph of their Head; and the dignity in which He is enthroned, is to them the assured pledge of an exceeding and eternal weight of glory.

To represent, therefore, Christ as dying for all mankind, —while by far the greater part of the human race never hear his name, and few who hear it receive benefit from it, —utterly destroys the harmony of the Old and New Testaments, and also confounds the families of the first and second Adam. It is evident that Christ’s suretiship and sufferings are of the same extent, the former being the ground of the latter; but Christ is not the Surety of all men; he is the Surety of the new covenant; his blood is the blood of the new covenant; and therefore he did not suffer and die for all men, but for the children of that covenant.

In consequence of God having purchased the Church with His own blood, its members are, in their successive generations, brought within the bond of the covenant, which is ordered in all things and sure. He undertook for the children of this covenant; he finished the work which, as their Kinsman Redeemer and Surety, He had engaged to perform; and has now received power over all flesh, that He might communicate to all the children of the covenant eternal life.

When the sons of Jacob went down to Egypt, Judah became surety for his youngest brother; and when Joseph intimated his intention of retaining him as a bondman, according to his engagement, Judah nobly offered to remain in his stead. Supposing Benjamin to have been guilty of the theft, the offer might have been accepted, —Judah might have been retained; but how great would have been the injustice of Joseph, had both the substitute and the principal been retained in bondage! No human transaction, however, can adequately illustrate the suretiship of Christ; and all our attempts to explain, by illustration, the dependence of mankind upon Adam, or of the elect upon Christ, only darken counsel by words without knowledge. The suretiship of Adam and of Christ is a matter of pure revelation, which none receive but by the teaching of the Holy Spirit. It is a part of that knowledge which no man can teach his neighbour. To those who have not received the wisdom which cometh from above, it ever has been, and ever will be, a stumbling-block; and the question, “How can these things be?” will be reiterated by the wisdom of this world, from which we must cease before we enter the kingdom of God.

CHAPTER XV.

God’s Love to all Mankind.

IN treating of our Lord’s words to Nicodemus, John iii. 16, 17, Dr Wardlaw insists much upon God’s love to “the world, —to mankind, —to the race,”— “the world of mankind,”— “to men generally considered.” We shall afterwards take occasion to attend to the Lord’s conversation with Nicodemus; at present, we shall consider the proposition so confidently maintained, —that the love of God extends to each individual of the race of Adam.

God is good to all; He maketh his sun to shine on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust; He openeth his hand and satisfieth the desire of every living thing. Hence it is written, “No man knoweth either love or hatred by all that is before them. All things come alike to all: there is one event to the righteous and to the wicked; to the good and to the clean, and to the unclean; to him that sacrificeth, and to him that sacrificeth not: as is the good, so is the sinner; and he that sweareth as he that feareth an oath,” Eccles, ix. 1, 2. Moses says, “He loveth the stranger, in giving him food and raiment,” Deut. x. 18.

In this world, the wicked are often the most prosperous, and enjoy the greatest share of temporal comforts. Even under the Jewish economy, where national prosperity was inseparably connected with obedience, the afflictions of the righteous, and the prosperity of the wicked, occasioned much perplexity to the true servants of God. Thus we find Jeremiah saying, — “Righteous art thou, O Lord, when I plead with thee: yet let me talk with thee of thy judgements: Wherefore doth the way of the wicked prosper? wherefore are all they happy that deal very treacherously?” Jer. xii. 1. The Psalmist informs us, that the prosperity of evil doers had been a stumbling-block over which he had well-nigh fallen, Psal. lxxiii. 2, 3. It was only when he looked beyond this life, and reflected on their end, —how they were brought into desolation as in a moment, that the snare was broken, ver. 17—19. This prosperity, however, is no proof of the love of God; “the prosperity of fools shall destroy them.” “When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is that they shall be destroyed forever,” Psal. xcii. 7. God giveth them the good things of this life, and they nourish their hearts as in a day of slaughter; but “the curse of the Lord is in the house of the wicked,” Prov. iii. 33. God’s people are represented as a poor and afflicted people, whom the Lord chasteneth because he loveth them; for he scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.

Dr Wardlaw may make distinctions between God as a rectoral Governor, and as a Sovereign, but we find nothing like this in Scripture. God is one. He is at once the God of providence and the God of grace. He is holy in all his ways: and the continuance of the world, and his providential care of those who live and die in their sins, is for the sake of the elect, whom he hath chosen; just as the days of vengeance were shortened when Jerusalem was destroyed, so that the destruction of the whole nation was prevented. —Matt. xxiv. 22. We see how all God’s providential dealings with the nations were subservient to his purposes in regard to Israel. “I am the Lord thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee. Since thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast been honourable, and I have loved thee: therefore will I give men for thee, and people for thy life,” Isa. xliii. 3, 4. “For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: But because the Lord loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the Lord brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.” Deut. vii. 6, 7, 8. “The Lord’s portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance,” Deut. xxxii. 9.

One important end which God had in view in the choice of the nation of Israel, was, to exhibit in them his love to the true Israel. For two thousand years, God’s attention appeared to be occupied with one family; all others being suffered to walk in their own ways. While he winked at their ignorance, he raised up a succession of prophets in Israel, reproving, warning, and admonishing them. They stood in a peculiar relation to God. He represents himself as being married to them (Jer. iii. 14); and his care of them forms a very striking contrast with his conduct to the rest of the world. Of this we have a proof in the following passage, in which his treatment of Israel is contrasted with his treatment of the heathen. “O Lord, correct me, but with judgement; not in thine anger, lest thou bring me to nothing. Pour out thy fury upon the heathen that know thee not, and upon the families that call not on thy name: for they have eaten up Jacob, and devoured him, and consumed him, and have made his habitation desolate,” Jer. x. 24,25.

Hence it is evident that the messages addressed to Israel, and God’s professions of love towards them, cannot justly be considered as a warrant to use the same language indiscriminately under the new dispensation. Take an example from the prophet Isaiah. The Lord, after complaining that Israel had been weary of him, had bought him no sweet cane with money, neither filled him with the fat of their sacrifices, but made him to serve with their sins, and wearied him with their iniquities, adds, “I, even I, am He that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins,” Isa. xliii. 25.

It is true, there is in the kingdom of Christ neither Jew nor Greek, —the Gospel is preached to all mankind, —all are besought to be reconciled to God through Jesus Christ, and, in receiving him, to become the true circumcision; but still the language addressed to Israel of old belongs only to those who are Christ’s, and, consequently, Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. All who come under the sound of the Gospel are assured that there is forgiveness with God for the chief of sinners who believe in Jesus, —that whosoever will receive pardon through Christ shall enjoy the blessing; but until we believe, we cannot with propriety be addressed as God addressed that people, which he brought into covenant with himself. All the promises are yea and amen in Christ; they are all fulfilled in him; whence he is called the Beginner and Finisher of faith. In those who obtained a good report through faith, we see the life of faith begun; yet they received not the promise; they mouldered in the dust like other men; but in Jesus we see the end of the life of faith. He is risen to the power of an endless life, and by faith we are encouraged to appropriate all the promises made to our Glorious Head in behalf of his body, the Church. Hence the Apostle quotes, for the encouragement of all believers, what the Lord said to Joshua: “I will never leave thee nor forsake thee,” Heb. xiii. 5. But this cannot be said to mankind in general. Christ is the treasury, in which is laid up every spiritual and heavenly blessing; and by faith sinners have access to all which it contains.

Every part of the Scripture history proves that the sentiment of God’s universal love to mankind, when understood as including those who are not of the number of the elect, is erroneous. We have seen that the distinction at first made between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent, was visibly kept up till the appearance of Christ. The greater part of mankind were left in darkness and ignorance, while a remnant were favoured with the light of revelation. God declares he will make a full end of all nations, whither he had driven Israel; but would not make a full end of them, but correct them in measure. — Jer. xlvi. 28.

Did God love Pharaoh? — Rom. ix. 17. Did he love the Amalekites? — Exod. xvii. 14. Did he love the Canaanites, whom he commanded to be extirpated without mercy? — Deut. xx. 16. Did he love the Ammonites and Moabites, whom he commanded not to be received into the congregation forever? — Deut. xxiii. 3. Does he love the workers of iniquity? — Psal. v. 5. On the other hand, he loves his people when dead in trespasses and sins. — Eph. ii. 4, 5. Does he love the vessels of wrath, fitted to destruction, whom he endures with much longsuffering? — Rom. ix. 22. Did he love Esau? — Rom. ix. 13. He tells us he will have mercy on whom he will have mercy; does he love those on whom he will have no mercy, —nay, whom he hardeneth? No! Whom he loveth he loveth to the end. All the wickedness of Jerusalem, although it exceeded that of Sodom (Ezek. xvi. 47—52) and of the heathen whom the Lord had destroyed before the children of Israel, (2 Chron. xxxiii. 9,) has not alienated his love. The Lord concludes the black catalogue of the sins of Jerusalem, not with the denunciation of utter destruction, as he does in regard to Edom, but by declaring that He will establish his covenant with her, and be pacified toward her, for all that she had done. — Ezek. xvi. 60—63.

The gifts and calling of God are without repentance. It pleased the Lord to make Israel his people, therefore he will not forsake them, for his great name’s sake. 1 Sam. xii. 22. Not only the old, but also the new covenant, is made with the house of Israel, and the house of Judah. The Gentiles obtain salvation by becoming the children of Abraham, (Gal. iii. 29,) and the mystery of their being grafted, contrary to nature, into the good olive-tree, is much insisted on. Nothing can more clearly demonstrate that Dr Wardlaw’s views of God’s universal love to mankind is a chimera.

It is alleged that God is love, and therefore his love must be universal. Yes, God is love; but this did not prevent the angels who kept not their first estate but left their own habitation, being reserved in chains under darkness to the judgement of the great day. No saviour was provided for them; they are lost. It will hardly be alleged that they were the objects of the Divine love. God is love, and this is manifested by love being the fulfilling of the law under which his creatures are placed. But the grandest manifestation of God being love, is his dealings with his people, in sending his only begotten Son that they might live through him—in sending his Son to be the propitiation for their sins. “Yes,” replies Dr Wardlaw, “for the sins of the human race;” while he admits, that had it not been for God’s special love to his people, —his sovereign purpose of saving the elect, —this stupendous plan would not have resulted in the salvation of one individual. He holds that the communication of the Spirit is as essential to salvation as the sacrifice of Christ, and that this is only given to the elect. As to others, multitudes never hear of the Saviour, and the condemnation of many who hear the Gospel, is aggravated by their rejecting it, which would assuredly have been the case with all, were it not prevented by God’s love to his people.

God is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity; he cannot look upon sin, he hateth all the workers of iniquity, (Ps. v. 5.); how then can any of the human race escape? Only in and through Christ. “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of  sins, according to the riches of his grace.” Eph. i. 3—7. Christ is the Head of his body the Church, and to him eternal life was promised in behalf of his brethren, before the world began. Tit. i. 2. Viewing them in their glorious Surety and Substitute, God loved them with an everlasting love, and they are complete in him.

In the Old Testament, in which spiritual and heavenly things are exhibited under the emblem of those which are carnal and earthly, we see the nation which God chose for his own inheritance, distinguished by his love. “He showed his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgements unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgements, they have not known them. Praise ye the Lord,” Ps. cxlvii. 19, 20. “You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities,” Amos iii. 2. All God’s dealings with other nations were subservient to his purposes toward Israel, whether of correction or of mercy. He employed the Chaldeans to scourge his people, and laid Babylon desolate for their cruelty. Amalek attacked Israel when coming out of Egypt, and he blotted out their name from under heaven. The Ammonites and Moabites met not his people with bread and with water, when they came forth out of Egypt, and he commanded that they should not enter into the congregation of the Lord, forever. Deut. xxiii. 3, 4. Edom was cut off forever, on account of his violence against his brother Jacob. Obadiah 10. All God’s judgements upon the heathen were connected with his purposes of love and mercy to Israel. “When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel,” Deut, xxxii. 8. And therefore we find his mercy celebrated, not merely for the blessings which he bestowed on his people, but also for the vengeance which he executed on their enemies. “To him that smote Egypt in their first-born: for his mercy endureth for ever: And brought out Israel from among them: for his mercy endureth for ever: With a strong hand, and with a stretched-out arm: for his mercy endureth forever. To him which divided the Red sea into parts: for his mercy endureth for ever: And made Israel to pass through the midst of it: for his mercy endureth for ever: But overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red sea: for his mercy endureth forever. To him which led his people through the wilderness: for his mercy endureth forever. To him which smote great kings: for his mercy endureth forever: And slew famous kings: for his mercy endureth forever: Sihon king of the Amorites: for his mercy endureth forever: And Og the king of Bashan: for his mercy endureth forever: And gave their land for an heritage: for his mercy endureth forever: Even an heritage unto Israel his servant: for his mercy endureth forever.” Psal. cxxxvi. 10—22.

That dispensation is now at an end; no man is known after the flesh. The Gospel is commanded to be preached indiscriminately to all, and every believer is acknowledged as a child of Abraham, —a member of the righteous nation which keepeth the truth. The history of Israel after the flesh is a parable. On account of their descent from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and their consequent relation to Christ, they were brought into covenant with God, and were the objects of his special love. The true Israel, who are “circumcised with the circumcision made without hands,” in whom Christ is formed the hope of glory, and in whose heart he dwells by faith, are now the objects of God’s love; all things are for their sakes, 2 Cor. iv. 15; all things are theirs, life or death, things present, or things to come, 1 Cor. iii. 21—23. God no more loves all mankind now than he did formerly: He then loved a particular nation on account of their carnal relation to Christ, and He now loves those who are spiritually related to his Son. God’s ancient people were born of corruptible seed; his people now are born of incorruptible seed, —their inheritance is the heavenly country; and as God watched over his ancient people, blessing them, and doing them good, the true Israel are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation. Israel of old were beloved, not as individuals, but as a nation; but every individual of the righteous nation is an object of the love of God. God led the nation of Israel out of Egypt, and brought them into covenant with himself. The true Israel are gathered one by one, Isa. xxvii. 12. It must be so, for the law is written on the heart of every child of the new covenant, while the national covenant was written on tables of stone, 2 Cor. iii. 3.

Once more, if the love of God be universal, then he still loves those who are lifting up their eyes in hell, being in torment; else he is mutable, and does not “rest in his love.” This is self-evident, and is of itself sufficient to prove the fallacy of the sentiment, —of God’s universal love to the human race.

Dr Wardlaw admits God’s special love to his people. But all his love is special. There is an innumerable multitude of our fallen race whom God hath loved with an everlasting love, and for whom he hath prepared a kingdom; but they were not by nature the objects of his love, —they were by nature children of wrath, even as others; they were under the curse, dead in sins, —they were hateful, and hating one another. In them dwelt no good thing, but they were called, according to his own purpose and grace, which was given them in Christ Jesus before the world began. They were redeemed from the curse of the law with the blood of Christ, and, in their successive generations, with loving-kindness does he draw them to himself. He looks on them in the face of his Anointed. He has blotted out as a thick cloud their transgressions, and as a cloud their sins. — Isa. xliv. 22. In regard to all others of Adam’s race, he will say, “Depart from me, I never knew you.”

In what, may we ask, does the universal love of God terminate? In the greater part going down the broad road to destruction. It may be said, It is their own fault; they loved the darkness, and hated the light. True, but this is the fruit of their condemnation, —of their being separated from God by the curse; so that only He who caused the light to shine out of darkness, can shine into their heart, giving them the light of the knowledge of the glory of God, in the face of Jesus Christ. None are saved but by a new creation, —by the power exerted in raising Christ from the dead. The greater part of mankind never heard of the only way of coming to God, John xiv. 6 of the only door of Christ’s sheep-fold, John x. 9; —of the only name given under heaven among men by which they may be saved. Can anyone, with these admitted facts before his eyes, maintain the doctrine of God’s universal love to mankind! Of what avail would be a universal Atonement which left men in such awful circumstances? It would be but a mockery, after all. The Atonement of Christ was made for his people. All the subjects of his kingdom were purchased with the inestimable price of his blood. They must all hear his voice, and shall walk with him in white, in the streets of the new Jerusalem.

CHAPTER XVI.

Examination of John iii. 16, 17.

JOHN THE BAPTIST had preached that the kingdom of God was at hand; and this was confirmed by the preaching of Jesus. Nicodemus, convinced by the Lord’s miracles that he was a teacher come from God, desired information respecting this kingdom, and was told, that those only were its subjects who had been born again. This appeared strange to one who, in common with his countrymen, considered it a matter of course, that Israel, so long distinguished as God’s peculiar people, should enjoy the privileges of the kingdom of which their prophets had spoken during a period of fifteen hundred years. In opposition to the warning given by John, not to trust in their relation to Abraham, Matt. iii. 9, he imagined that the blessings of Messiah’s reign would be confined to Israel, and that, under his victorious banner, they should go forth to execute vengeance on the heathen who knew not God, and by whom Israel had been so long oppressed, Ps. cxlix, 6, 7; Isaiah xli. 15, 16.

The Lord, having described himself as the Son of man who came down from heaven, proceeded to inform Nicodemus that, in correspondence with the lifting up of the serpent in the wilderness, he was to be lifted up, that whosoever believed in him might not perish, but have eternal life; adding, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved,” John iii. 16, 17.

Here the Lord gives the explanation of whosoever, which the Jewish ruler would undoubtedly have understood to refer to Israel, but he was taught that it included men of all nations. Dr Wardlaw tells us, that God’s love “to mankind—to the race, ought not to be questioned by any who believe that in these words Jesus spoke truth.” I shall not stop to comment upon the irreverence of this remark. I leave it as it stands, although, considering the different senses in which the general term world is employed, it might well have been spared. “Do not,” he says again, “contradict the Saviour himself by denying that he loved the world.” Dr Wardlaw surely knows that the whole is often used in Scripture for a part; —thus, all Judea is said to be baptized of John, Mat. iii. 5, 6, and yet Christ made and baptized more disciples than John, John iv. 1.

We have already examined the statement that God’s love extends to the world, and have shown that it is not only destitute of any solid foundation, but that its fallacy is practically demonstrated by the history of God’s dealings with the human race from the beginning down to the present time. It is passing strange that any one should, at the same time, hold this sentiment and the doctrine of personal election. Dr Wardlaw admits that, had it not been for personal election, none would have been saved. Of what avail, then, is God’s love to the non-elect? He says, there is a “special love to his people but what kind of love is that, the objects of which are “the children of wrath,”— alienated from God, under the curse of the law, and who are permitted to perish in their sins either without once hearing of the way of escape, and consequently dying in unbelief, Rom. x. 14; or having their condemnation aggravated by their rejection of the Gospel through their love of darkness and hatred of light!

The question is —What is the meaning of the term world, in this passage? If it necessarily mean the whole human race, doubtless Dr Wardlaw’s assertion of God’s universal love to mankind is clearly established; but he well knows such is not necessarily the meaning of the word. Sometimes it denotes the wicked, in contrast with God’s people. “If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you,” John xv. 18; see also John xiv. 17—19. It is used for the Gentiles exclusively. “I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. Now, if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles, how much more their fulness? For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them. For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?” Rom. xi. 11—15. It is used also for men of all nations, whether Jews or Gentiles: “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them,”[*******] 2 Cor. v. 19. The use of the term world, in the passage under consideration, cannot then be a proof of God’s universal love to mankind, —a, sentiment opposed to the whole tenor of scripture, and to the fact that the gate which leads to life is strait, and few there be that find it. Dr Wardlaw may indeed reply, —I keep to the word here made use of; Jesus says, God so loved the world; but you tell us it is only a part of the world. Various passages have been adduced, to which more shall afterwards be added, in which the same word is used, while all must admit that it is not to be taken in a universal sense. The Apostle tells us, the WHOLE WORLD lieth in wickedness; hence we might argue, that none shall escape; and if any should observe that this interpretation contradicts the former clause of the verse, — “we know that we are of God,”—we might reply, we adhere to the Apostle’s words, he tells us the whole world lieth in wickedness.

The best comment on our Lord’s words, —"God so loved the world,”—is the song of the redeemed: “And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation” Rev. v. 9. And, again, the Apostle, after enumerating the tribes of Israel, of which twelve thousand of each tribe were sealed, adds, “After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; and cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God, which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb,” Rev. vii. 9, 10. Here is the world which God so loved as to give his only begotten Son, “men of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues” Again, we are informed that on the day of Pentecost there were dwelling at Jerusalem devout men “out of every nation under heaven.” This is at least as strong an expression as “the world,” and yet no one supposes it is to be understood as necessarily including men from Britain and China. So that the principle of interpretation for which our author contends, must be abandoned.

Dr Wardlaw alleges, that the limiting statement, — “that whosoever believeth should not perish, but have everlasting life, —establishes the universality of the phraseology used in the beginning of the verse, —"God so loved the world.” But this by no means follows; the limitation is equally necessary whether “the world” be understood in a limited or universal sense. Supposing the world to mean either the Gentiles or men of all nations, —in both which senses it occurs in the word of God, —the limitation is as necessary as if the world had denoted the whole race of mankind. It points out the only way of salvation by faith in the Son of God.

In the passage under consideration, while the term world includes men of all nations, Jews and Gentiles, it particularly refers to the latter. The Jews connected the privileges which they expected under Messiah’s reign with the judgements of God upon the Gentiles; but the Lord informed Nicodemus that the Son of God had come, not for the condemnation, but for the salvation, of men of all nations, whether Jews or Gentiles. The middle wall of partition was to be broken down, and peace to be proclaimed to them that were afar off, as well as to them that were nigh.

Thus it is apparent that in his discourse with Nicodemus, the Lord intimated that the peculiar privileges of Israel were about to cease, —that there was to be under the new dispensation no respect of persons, —that God was no longer to be the God of the Jews only, but “of the Gentiles also: seeing it is one God which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith,” Rom. iii. 30; for whosoever —Jew or Greek —believed in the Son of man, who was about to be lifted up, should not perish, but have eternal life. This was a rude shock to the prejudices of the Jewish ruler, and therefore the Lord proceeds to illustrate what he had said, by adding, “for God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved.” The world here obviously means men of all nations. For two thousand years, the knowledge of God had been confined to Israel; during that period preparations had been going forward for the manifestation of the Son of God. The day was now about to break, and the shadows to flee away; the kingdom of God was to be preached, and “every man” was to press into it. “All flesh was to see the salvation of God.” Jesus was to be lifted up, and was to “draw all men unto him.” God’s love to the world is evidently in contrast with the love with which he had loved Israel, Deut. xxxiii. 3. He was now to show the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, whom he had afore prepared unto glory, even those whom he should call, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles, Rom. ix. 23, 24.

If in John iii. 16, we are to understand by the world all mankind, how different is the language of other passages, — “I never knew you.” Were those whom he never knew, and to whom he will say, depart from me, the objects of God’s love?

In proportion as men depart from just views of the Atonement, they approximate to those who, perverting the declaration that God is love, which is manifested by sending his Son into the world that his people might live through him, —represent this love as embracing all mankind, and issuing in universal salvation; which indeed is the necessary result of God’s universal love. The world which God loved, is the world which shall be saved through faith in his Son, —the world to which he will not impute their trespasses, — a countless multitude of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues.

Dr Wardlaw dwells on the absurdity of understanding by the world, in this passage, “the elect in the world” because it is added, that whosoever “believeth in him should not perish; that being a position which would imply that some of the elect might not believe, and might thus incur perdition.” We answer, 1st, No such thing would be implied. Faith is the manifestation of election; the two are inseparably connected. We can only know our election by our calling, 2 Pet. i. 10. If by the world we were to understand the elect, the following clause would show how their election was to be ascertained. 2dly, We understand the world in this passage, to mean men of all nations, with an especial reference to the Gentiles, whom the Jews considered to be accursed, and who are here put upon the same footing with Israel, as being equally the objects of the Divine love.

Although the various parts of the plan of salvation may be distinguished, they form one connected whole. We may speak of the incarnation, sufferings, and death of Jesus, his resurrection and exaltation to the right hand of God, his being invested with all power in heaven and in earth; but these are all constituent parts of the same stupendous plan, —they cannot be separated, — they mutually depend on each other. Having expiated the sins of his people, in other words, having purchased the Church —to be gathered out of all nations, —with his own blood, Christ is exalted a Prince and a Saviour, to give them repentance, by manifesting himself to them in their successive generations, in a way he doth not to the world. Dr Wardlaw explains God granting repentance unto life, Acts xi. 18, as evidently meaning, “in the spirit of the words, the granting of the means, as revealed in the Gospel, of restoration to God, to holiness, and to happiness,” p. 227. But the disciples were speaking of Cornelius and his friends, to whom God had not only granted the means, but the blessing of repentance; and it is abundantly evident that the same thing is implied in the words of the Apostle, when he proclaims Christ’s exaltation as a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance and forgiveness of sins, for it is limited to Israel, the people of God. —Acts v. 31.

The principle upon which Dr Wardlaw interprets “granting repentance unto life,” as merely granting the means of restoration to God, would neutralize, or at least dilute, many of the most precious promises of the word of God. “I give unto them (my sheep) eternal life,” must, on this principle, be understood, “I grant them the means, as revealed in the Gospel, of restoration to God, to holiness, and to happiness.”

We are told that the servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle unto all men—in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance, to the acknowledging of the truth, 2 Tim. ii. 24, 25. Here, as elsewhere, giving repentance does not mean, “in the spirit of the words,” the granting of the means of restoration, for that they already enjoyed while opposing the servant of the Lord; it means turning men from darkness unto light; taking away the heart of stone, and giving them an heart of flesh. Again: “unto you it is given, in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe, but to suffer for his sake,” must, “in the spirit of the words,” mean, Unto you is granted, in the behalf of Christ, “the means, as revealed in the Gospel,” not only of believing, but of suffering for his sake. The sufferings, however, of the Philippians were real; and so was the faith bestowed on them.

But how does it comport with Dr Wardlaw’s idea of God’s universal love to mankind, that he did not give the means of repentance and forgiveness to the Gentiles till so late a period, but left them in ignorance and darkness for two thousand years since the call of Abraham, and that to this day so small a part of the world enjoys the means of repentance and forgiveness?

On the whole, this passage, which Dr Wardlaw deems so conclusive in favour of the universality of the Atonement, simply teaches us, that the blessings of salvation were to be extended to all nations, —that no man was to be known after the flesh, —that henceforth there was to be neither Jew nor Greek, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free; that, through faith, the objects of the Divine love should come from the east and the west, the north and the south, and sit down in the kingdom of God. And this is the uniform doctrine of the New Testament.

CHAPTER XVII.

The Bearing of the New System on the Doctrine of Justification by Faith.

IN developing his views of the nature and extent of the Atonement, Dr Wardlaw discovers very erroneous views of the fundamental doctrine of justification. He informs his readers that on the ground of the merits of the Atonement, “had God willed it, fallen angels might have been saved as well as fallen men; nay, had there been a thousand rebel worlds, the inhabitants of them all.” How could fallen angels be saved by an Atonement made by the Son of God in human nature? The Apostle tells us, “He took not on him the nature of angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham,” in consequence of which, salvation is entailed on the family of Abraham, so that the Gentiles are saved by becoming his children, —being graffed, contrary to nature, into the good olive-tree. Again: we are taught, that in order to Christ being a merciful and faithful High Priest, that he might make reconciliation for the sins of the people, it behoved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren; and that in virtue of his having himself suffered, being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted; and upon this ground we are encouraged to come boldly to the throne of grace, Heb. iv. 15, 16. How, then, could the obedience unto death of the Son of Man, atone for the sins of a separate race? How could the shedding of blood remove the guilt of angels? The fact is, the new system altogether sets aside the Atonement. There is not the shadow of an Atonement, but in its place, a clumsy expedient to uphold the moral government of God, by making an impression on the minds of His creatures. Surely, if this alone had been necessary, the Son of God would never have appeared in the form of a servant. The hearts of all creatures are in the hand of the Lord; He turneth them whithersoever He will. His proceedings, independently of the judgement of his creatures, must have corresponded with the perfection of His character; and He would have been at no loss to impress on the minds of men and angels the firmest conviction that the ways of the Lord are right.

But how is the moral government of God upheld by the infliction of punishment on One who was perfectly innocent, in whose heart the law of God was written, and whose meat and drink it was to do His will! Is it here that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hid? Is this the wisdom of God, in a mystery into which the angels desire to look? It resembles the proceedings of an Eastern despot, who, to vindicate the authority of his government, should desolate a province which had steadfastly retained its loyalty, and on the strength of this infliction, “offer” pardon to the rebels.

But it seems, not only might the fallen angels have been saved by the sufferings of Christ, but the inhabitants of a thousand rebel worlds. It would have made no difference by what species of intelligent beings these worlds were inhabited. The Apostle tells us, “Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who, through fear of death, were all their lifetime subject to bondage.” —Heb. ii. 14,15. But, according to Dr Wardlaw, there was no need of this: the death of Christ “was an Atonement FOR SIN, an Atonement whose value was so unlimited and properly infinite, —that on the ground of its merits,” rebels of every species might have been saved! He goes on to state his full acquiescence in the sentiments of Dr Payne, to which we have (page 75) already referred.

The moral government of God, so far from being endangered, was, if we may so speak, confirmed by the rebellion of the angels, which issued in their perdition, thus proving that no creature, however exalted, should violate God’s holy law with impunity. Had man shared their fate, an additional proof would have been given, that though hand join in hand, the wicked shall not go unpunished. It is true that unconditional forgiveness would have entirely destroyed God’s moral government, for it would have been inconsistent both with justice and truth. The problem which Infinite Wisdom alone could solve, was, how, in God’s dealings with mankind, mercy and truth should meet together, righteousness and peace should mutually embrace. In other words, how glory in the highest should redound to God, connected with peace on earth, and good-will to a countless multitude of our fallen race.

This was accomplished by the incarnation of the Son of God; and the reason why none but the Man who was the fellow of the Almighty, could make an Atonement for sinners of mankind, was, that it behoved Him that sanctifieth and those that are sanctified, to be both of one, Heb. ii. 11; and that He alone who thought it not robbery to be equal with God, could endure the curse of the broken law, —could offer himself a willing sacrifice, —could lay down his life and take it again, —could, by his obedience, magnify and put honour on that law upon which those whose Surety and Substitute he had become had trampled, and thus restore what he took not away. All this was accomplished by the Lord Jesus: not only did he make reconciliation for iniquity, and bury the sins of his brethren in the depths of the sea, but he brought in everlasting righteousness, arrayed in which they might stand before God without spot or wrinkle. Many of them had gone the way of all the earth,—many had not come into existence, but they had all been given to him in the everlasting council; he had undertaken for them; their names were enrolled in the book of life; and having died for their sins, and been raised for their justification, the great Mediator of the new covenant, uniting in his wonderful person the divine and human natures, was invested with power over all flesh, that he might give eternal life to all his blood-bought sheep; that as he who knew no sin had been made sin for them, they who had drank up iniquity as the ox drinketh up water, might stand before God, in a robe of righteousness so glorious as to eclipse the lustre of the robes of the angels of light.

This most important part of the mystery of Christ appears to form no part of Dr Wardlaw’s system. He, no doubt, holds the doctrine of justification by faith, but he razes its foundation. Believers are said to be justified by faith, because, through the truth Christ takes up his abode in their hearts, communicating to them his Spirit, and thus completing the union begun when he took part with them in flesh and blood; so that, being one with him, they are exalted in his righteousness. This is the ground of the justification of God’s people; it is of faith, that it might be by grace, — boasting is excluded. If our belief were the ground of our justification, we might glory in our faith as well as in our works; but faith leads us entirely out of ourselves, it terminates in Christ —on his finished work; and hence the Gospel, —by the hearing of which faith is produced, —is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth; for therein is the righteousness of God revealed, and by faith it is appropriated.

Many have no doubt of the truth of the Gospel; but the Gospel which they believe is not the Gospel of God, —it is another gospel. Their hope terminates on some fancied superiority over others, —possibly on their faith —which gives them, in their own eyes, some ground of boasting in themselves; the believer glories only in the Lord.

Dr Wardlaw tells us, “the end, or design, for which Christ died, —for which he offered up the sacrifice of himself, was TO PUT AWAY SIN,” p. 105. Considered in itself then, the Atonement was as much offered for the fallen angels, or for the “thousand rebel worlds,” as for the elect of God, although its application was limited to them. It opened a door for all sinful creatures, while salvation was confined to a part of the race of Adam. How directly opposed is this view of the incarnation and death of Christ is to the word of God, is abundantly obvious.

The Scriptures teach us that by uniting himself with his people, by becoming their Brother and near Kinsman, Christ had the right of redemption; and that he came to do his Father’s will, in ransoming from destruction one of the two great families into which mankind had been divided on the first intimation of the coming of the Saviour. By enduring the curse which they had incurred, he obtained for them the blessing of eternal salvation. In this stupendous plan, there is not merely an expression of God’s displeasure against sin, but a real satisfaction made for the breach of his holy law. Everlasting righteousness is brought in, in a way exactly conformable to the introduction of sin. As by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one are many made righteous; and as sin hath reigned unto death by the rebellion of Adam, and the consequent condemnation and depravity of all his posterity, so grace reigns through righteousness unto eternal life, by the obedience unto death of the second Adam, and the consequent communication of his Spirit, by which his children are created anew, and brought into the glorious liberty of the sons of God.

In consequence of the unity between Adam and his posterity, a unity as real as that between the head and the members of the body, all were involved in his guilt and condemnation; and, in consequence of the unity of the elect with the Son of God, who was made of a woman, made under the law, his obedience and death procured for them pardon and eternal life, while justice received full satisfaction: and the truth of God, who had denounced death to be the wages of sin, was fully vindicated, by the redeemed enduring the penalty in the person of their glorious Head, Representative, and Surely, and thus becoming dead unto sin, and alive unto God by Jesus Christ.

Dr Wardlaw had said that the Atonement “left the Divine Being at liberty to pardon whom he would.” Dr Marshall objects to the expression, as savouring of presumption, while Dr Wardlaw replies,—“It means no more than that the Atonement is not to be regarded as involving such a legal satisfaction as to lay the Supreme Ruler under an obligation of justice to pardon and save all for whom it was made, —that it was of such a nature as to leave him free from any such obligation; free in the exercise of his sovereign grace to have mercy on whom he will have mercy, and compassion on whom he will have compassion.”

That God has mercy on whom he will, —that he is sovereign in the bestowment of salvation, —is unquestionable. The redeemed were chosen in Christ, before the foundation of the world, out of the mass of mankind, but sovereign grace reigns through righteousness. The Son of God came to do his Father’s will; and we are taught that by this will his people are sanctified by the offering of his body once for all, —that he bore their sins in his own body on the tree, — that the counsel of peace stood between the Father and the Son, —that if he made his soul an offering for sin, he should see his seed, should prolong his days, and should see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied. Accordingly, he purchased the Church with his own blood; he gave his life a ransom for many, and surely it is no impeachment of the Father’s grace that none of the sheep given to the good Shepherd, and ransomed with his blood, shall perish.

What was forfeited by their guilt is restored by his righteousness; the Gospel is the revelation of that righteousness, and is therefore the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes the report. It exhibits God as not only faithful, but just in forgiving the sins of his people, for the law which they had broken has, by Christ’s obedience, been magnified and made honourable. Dr Wardlaw quotes the following passage from Mr. Fuller, who has been the principal means of spreading in this country the new system: — “He doubts whether the moral Governor of the world should be considered as by the Atonement laid under any such kind of obligation to show mercy to sinners, as a creditor is under to discharge a debtor, on having received lull satisfaction at the hands of a surety.” The Scripture expressly teaches us, that Christ is the Surety of the new covenant, which secures pardon and eternal life to all his people; that it was ratified with his blood; that the Father hath in consequence committed all judgement to the Son, who is thus invested with supreme authority, that he might give eternal life to the children of the covenant, of whom therefore none shall be lost.

But does the efficacy of the Atonement made by the Lord interfere with the exercise of mercy and grace? Far from it. Who provided the surely? Whose will did Christ come to do? For what purpose did he receive power over all flesh, but to give eternal life to as many as the Father had given him? Having by himself—by offering the body prepared for him—purged their sins, he will present the Church unto himself a glorious Church, without spot or wrinkle. Dr Wardlaw observes, “To suppose full satisfaction to be made by Christ for his people, so that they were in strict justice entitled to salvation, is a denial of the grace of the Gospel.” In other words, if in his manifold wisdom God has opened a channel in which his boundless mercy flows in perfect harmony with his unsullied justice, no room is left for the exercise of grace. This is objecting to the perfection of the Divine procedure; it evinces a readiness to acknowledge God as a Saviour, but not a just God and a Saviour.

Dr Wardlaw seems frequently to lose sight of the unity of the Father and Son. The plan of salvation was the eternal purpose of God, by which He was to make known to the principalities and powers in heavenly places his manifold wisdom. Each of the Divine Persons performed a special part in the accomplishment of the great design. The Father chose the heirs of salvation in Christ, to whom he consigned them; the Son appeared in the form of a servant, to redeem them from the curse of the law, according to his Father’s will; and through the eternal Spirit offered himself as their Substitute, without spot unto God. Having finished the work, he entered into his glory, and received power over all flesh, that he might give eternal life to as many as the Father had given him. This he accomplishes by quickening them by the Holy Spirit, which, as the great Head of the body, he has received without measure. The Son can do nothing of himself, there must ever be the most perfect harmony among the Divine Persons, for they are one. All the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily in the Son; and the eternal salvation of all his brethren, —of all with whom he took part in flesh and blood, and whose sins he bore in his own body on the tree, —necessarily results from the immutability of God. Truth and justice demanded the condemnation of the guilty; truth and justice equally demand the justification of those who, in the person of their glorious Head, have magnified the law and made it honourable, and who, in the resurrection of their Surety, have received a full discharge; for he both died, and rose, and revived, not as an isolated individual, but as the Covenant Head and Representative of the Church, which is his body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all.

The plan of salvation is the fullest disclosure of all the Divine attributes; it harmonizes what appears irreconcilable, —the justification of those who had incurred God’s righteous condemnation; but all is marred by the figment of universal Atonement, which is no Atonement, for it does not prevent the greater part of those for whom it was made, going down the broad road to destruction.

In the plan of salvation, judgement is laid to the line, and righteousness to the plummet; the demands of justice are not in the slightest degree compromised; full obedience has been rendered by Christ, as the Substitute of his people, both to the precept and the penalty of the law; not one jot or tittle has passed; all has been fulfilled; and, consequently, the justice of God, so far from being an obstacle to the salvation of the redeemed, is, in fact, their security. It is just that those who have answered all the demands of the law should be absolved; it is just that those who are made the righteousness of God should reign in life by Jesus Christ; and hence the Gospel is termed the revelation of God’s righteousness. “Deliver me from blood-guiltiness, O God, thou God of my salvation,” says the Psalmist, “and my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness” Psal. li. 14. He had much reason to sing of God’s mercy; but as righteousness and peace kiss each other, he sings aloud of God’s righteousness in forgiving his sins. At the same time, the sinner owes all to the grace of God. On what ground does his salvation rest? on the gift of Christ. And to what are we indebted for the gift?. God was under no obligation to give his Son to die for sinners. He left the angels in everlasting chains, under darkness, to the judgement of the great day. Why did He show light to his people, by binding the sacrifice to the horns of the altar? Why did Christ take on him the seed of Abraham, and not the seed of Adam? Why does he quicken some who are dead in sins, and give up others to the blindness of then- own hearts? Surely it is to grace that believers are indebted for the difference made between them and angels, as well as between them and others of their own fallen race; and shall it be alleged, because the fullest demands of justice have been satisfied, that there is the slightest impeachment of His GRACE, who provided the Substitute, —who gave a countless multitude to his Son, to be ransomed from destruction, — and who, by the almighty energy of the Spirit, made the Gospel the power of God to their salvation? It is true that Divine justice demands that those who have suffered and obeyed in the person of their Surety, should be justified; but it was free and sovereign grace which formed the wondrous plan into which angels desire to look, and which is described as the revelation of the “righteousness of God.”

The objection, —that the full satisfaction made by the Son of God in behalf of his people, which gives them a title to draw near to their Covenant God with boldness and confidence, is inconsistent with their being wholly indebted to grace, —is utterly groundless. The justified sinner traces all to free and sovereign grace. He has nothing of his own which entities him to boast. It is true he stands before God in a righteousness more glorious than that of the holy angels, and which through eternity shall remain unimpaired. In his justification, the justice of God is most illustriously displayed; still, while the believer rejoices that no charge can be brought against him,—that the eye of Omniscience can discover no flaw in his title to eternal life, he will most cordially cast his crown before the throne of God and of the Lamb, acknowledging that he owes all to sovereign grace; that all the praise is due to Him who spared not his own Son, —to Him who left the throne of his glory to effect his redemption, and who washed him from his sins in His own blood, —to Him who enlightened his mind in the knowledge of the truth, and quickened him when dead in trespasses and sins. In short, the boundless riches of the grace of the Triune Jehovah will be his theme through the endless ages of eternity.

Nothing can more clearly prove that God’s ways are not our ways, nor his thoughts our thoughts, than the objection, that the representation of his being laid under an “obligation of justice” is inconsistent with the exercise of grace. The wisdom of God, in the plan of redemption, is too wonderful for us. It is high; we cannot attain unto it. We are apt to be dazzled with its brightness, and, consequently, to take a partial and distorted view of its grandeur. In Christ are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge; hence he is called the Wisdom of God. It is the glory of the Gospel that the believer rejoices no less in the justice than in the mercy of God. The incarnation of the Son, his entire conformity to his Father’s will, and his offering himself a ransom for many, in obedience to his Father’s commandment, were all completely gratuitous. The redeemed had no claim upon God, no reason to expect his favour; but when Christ had made his soul an offering for sin, justice and truth equally required that he should see of the travail of his soul, and be satisfied.

In virtue of their union with him, all his people can plead their title to the adoption of sons, and to the inheritance of which, as their elder Brother, he has taken possession in their name. When the proclamation is made, “Gather my saints unto me; those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice;” it is added, “and the heavens shall declare his righteousness” Psal. l. 5, 6. So perfect is the sacrifice by which the everlasting covenant was ratified, that the heavens are represented as declaring God’s righteousness in the justification of his saints. Hence he condescends to bear the name of “the Lord, OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.”

“Thou wilt perform,” says the prophet, “the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old,” Micah vii. 20. God's favour to Abraham was pure mercy; he had no claim upon God, but it was truth to Jacob. God had bound himself by an oath, but this did not diminish Jacob’s weight of obligation, or prevent the grace of God flowing to him through the promise.

In the resurrection of Christ, all the redeemed were justified. They died and rose in him; and none can now lay anything to their charge. If it be but a man’s covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth or addeth thereto. Now, to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. Was not, then, the veracity of God pledged for the fulfilment of the promises to all the seed? Rom. iv. 16; Titus i. 2. God was not left “free of obligation;” he was bound by the perfection of his character. It is impossible for God to lie. He cannot but fulfil his promise, for he is the God of truth. But are the heirs of promise less indebted to his grace? A man is bound by his promise; circumstances may occur which he did not foresee, and which, had he been aware of, he would not have made the engagement; but if he be a man of truth, he will keep it, notwithstanding. Now, God condescended to pledge both his promise and his oath to the Son of his love, and in him, to all his people. Nothing has happened, or could happen, of which he had not the most perfect foreknowledge, and over which he did not possess the most absolute control; and shall it be considered an impeachment of his grace that he is laid under an obligation, both by truth and justice, to bestow upon the redeemed eternal life? The great Surety of the covenant fulfilled all righteousness, yielded to the law all the obedience it required, endured its curse, and, consequently, all the children of the covenant must inherit the blessing.

Christ is their Advocate with the Father. He pleads for sinners, yet is he Jesus Christ the righteous; for his intercession is founded on the perfection of his offering. He disclaims praying for the world, declaring he never knew them. But he knows his sheep; he gives them eternal life; they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of his hand; and that they may have strong consolation, he teaches them equally to rest on the mercy, truth, and justice of God.

CHAPTER XVIII.

Observations on Divine Influence, and Upon Natural and Moral Inability.

WE have repeatedly observed, that where the doctrine of personal election is maintained, no real difficulty is got rid of by attempting to soften down the aspect which it presents to an unbelieving world, by adopting the notion of universal Atonement. Dr Wardlaw admits that “it is election, and, consequent divine influence, that insures actual salvation.” He might have gone farther, for without Divine influence salvation is impossible; this is the uniform doctrine of the word of God. Faith is always represented as the gift of God; and the power exercised towards those who believe, is compared to that mighty power by which Christ was raised from the dead, Eph. i. 19, 20.

Dr Wardlaw tells us, “With regard to all men to whom the Gospel comes, before whom its proposals are laid, and to whom its offers of pardoning mercy are addressed, it is, on the part of God, put in their option, or, which is the same thing, put in their power to be saved, —to obtain pardon and life; so that, if they fail of the blessing, the blame rests exclusively with themselves; ‘their blood is upon their own heads,’” p. 132. That the blood of those who perish is upon their own heads, is as certain as that the heathen are “without excuse” in not understanding God’s eternal power and Godhead by the works of creation. We are told it is put in men's option, that is, in their power to be saved; and has not God equally put salvation, by the deeds of the law, in men’s power, when he says, “the man that doeth these things shall live in them?” It is, then, “put in their option, or, which is the same thing, put in their power to be saved” by obedience. Yet the Scriptures tell us, By the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified; every mouth shall be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God. Like the Gibeonites, (Josh. ix. 23,) fallen man is cursed; hence he is the bond-servant of sin, and the servitude is not lightened by its being a willing servitude. This is its greatest aggravation; a prisoner may perhaps slip his chains and escape, but if, through derangement, he prefer bondage to liberty, —if he love his prison-house, and shrink from the light of day, his case is utterly hopeless.[†††††††] We are told he has “power to be saved,” by listening to the Gospel; he has precisely the same power to be saved by obeying the law: “This do, and thou shalt live,” Luke x. 28. In both cases, all he wants is inclination, —he is taken captive by the devil at his will; he is therefore “without strength;” and for precisely the same reason, he cannot come to Christ, —because the god of this world hath blinded the minds of those who believe not, lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Dr Wardlaw lays much stress on the difference between natural and moral inability, and there is, no doubt, a real difference; but moral inability is as absolute as that which is natural. Nay, the Lord represents it as more difficult to be overcome: He tells us “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.” Here the moral impossibility is represented as greater than the natural; but with God all things are possible.

God warns men of the consequence of disobedience; yet fallen man rolls sin as a sweet morsel under his tongue, and rushes against the thick bosses of Jehovah’s buckler. He hath sent forth his light and truth, but men love the darkness rather than light; such is the power of sin in their hearts, that they will not come to Christ that they may have life; they have the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart. The deceitfulness and desperate wickedness of the human heart, and its utter alienation from God, effectually prevent men from receiving the love of the truth. It is no more possible for fallen man of himself to receive the love of the truth that he may be saved, than to yield to the law the obedience which it demands. By the curse, man is cut off from God, —from the fountain of holiness; and there is in him, —that is, in his flesh, —in his fallen nature, —in his natural state, —no good thing. The way of salvation by Jesus Christ is directly contrary to our natural constitution. Man was made to live by obedience; and, amidst all his consciousness of guilt, he is irresistibly disposed to say, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. He must be created anew, —the stony heart must be taken out of his flesh, and a new heart given him, before he can receive the truth of salvation by grace through faith. A believer is as truly the Lord’s workmanship as the child who is born into the world: In the one case, as in the other, we must say, “This is the finger of God.”

We may perhaps be told that the Atonement has removed the curse; and, having been made for all, they have the “power” to return to God through his Son; but the wickedness of man, and his enmity against God, demonstrate the contrary. Dr Wardlaw admits that faith is the gift of God, —that the elect alone receive Christ, and salvation through him, — that without the effectual working of God’s power in the heart, none ever did or will receive the truth as it is in Jesus. Where, then, is the boasted “power to be saved?” Salvation, indeed, is “put in their option” just as salvation, by obedience to the law, is put in their option; but what does this avail, if only the almighty power of God can bring the sinner to Christ? There is one, and but one way, of access to God, through the rent vail of the Redeemer’s flesh, without a figure, through an incarnate and crucified Redeemer. Now, the Apostle teaches us that we can only approach in this way by the Spirit, “For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father,” Eph. ii. 18. Dr Wardlaw admits that the work of the Spirit is as necessary to salvation as the Atonement of Christ. Where, then, we again ask, is the boasted power to be saved, which he tells us all possess? We hold the doctrine of human responsibility as strongly as he can possibly do. Who compels us to violate the holy law? When we do so, we are self-condemned. Who prevents our believing the Gospel? The god of this world entered the heart of Adam in the form of a lie, and by falsehood maintains his lodgement in the hearts of all Adam’s posterity, till a stronger than he comes in the power of the truth, strips him of his armour, and causes the sinner, whom he bought with the inestimable price of his own blood, to escape as a bird from the snare of the fowler.

We have already adverted to Dr Wardlaw’s statement, that such was the unlimited value of the Atonement, that “on the ground of its merits, had God so willed it, fallen angels might have been saved, as well as fallen men; nay, had there been a thousand rebel worlds, the inhabitants of them all,” —p. 105. We have seen how directly this is opposed to the apostolic doctrine; we shall now consider another statement, the perfect antipodes of that now mentioned, but which actually surpasses it in extravagance.

Having mentioned that pardoning mercy is put in the option, or, which is the same thing, in the power of all to whom its proposals are addressed,[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] he proceeds: — “Holding, as I formerly announced, the doctrine of personal election to life, I yet conceive it to be of importance to discuss the present question, in the first instance, on the supposition of there being no such thing. We sometimes, nay many times, hear persons so represent matters, as if, had there been no election, the scheme of salvation must have been altogether abortive, —an entire failure, —having no result. Now, in one sufficiently obvious sense, this is true. It is election, and consequent divine influence that ensure actual salvation. But supposing there had been no such thing, would the failure have been complete? would there have been no valuable end answered? I should think it a very great mistake to say so. Supposing all had perished, would no end worthy of God have been effected, if God himself was vindicated in their perdition, under every aspect of his character, not only as the God of justice, (which he would have been independently of all Atonement, and of all provision for man's recovery,) but also, and that most gloriously, — as the God of mercy, —of mercy infinite and everlasting? Would it not have been to his eternal honour, that no sinner should have ground for the slightest surmise against the Being at whose hand he suffered, but should be made to feel, that, in every view, the cause of his perdition was in himself ; inasmuch as, not only was the law which he had broken, and whose final sentence he had incurred, unexceptionable both in its requirements and in its sanction, —“holy, just, and good,” but the Lawgiver had, in his infinite wisdom, devised, and in his infinite grace, carried into effect, a scheme for the honourable remission of its penalty, and on this ground, made him the offer of a free pardon, not of the commutation merely of his sentence, but of its reversal, from death to life! I ask again, as I did before, was it not a boon to the world, from the God of love, as our Lord clearly teaches us to regard it, when for the world salvation was provided by the mission and mediation of God’s Son? And was it not a worthy end, that in the eyes of the intelligent universe, his mercy should thus be magnified, and made to shine out with a lustre so transcendent, even although none of the sinning creatures to whom its all-gracious offers were made, saw fit to accept them? —Nay, would not the compassions of the Sovereign be made to appear the more signally captivating in the sight of his other intelligent creatures, by their very contrast with the ungrateful and base requital of them on the part of his rebellious human subjects? And would it not be glorifying to his name, that no victim of his punitive vengeance should be able, on any ground, to impute his perdition either to any failure in justice, or to any deficiency in mercy, on the part of his Maker and Judge, or should enjoy, in the slightest measure, the consolatory consciousness of its being in any view whatever, not his own fault.” —Pp. 182—134.

I have quoted this passage, that none may complain that the argument is injured by its abridgement.

In reply, we would ask, is there ground for the “slightest surmise” against God for his treatment of the rebel angels, —for whom he provided no way of escape? or would there have been any such ground, had all mankind, like them, been left to perish? As to the question whether it was not “a boon to the world,” when salvation was provided for it by the mission and mediation of God’s Son, we may observe, that Dr Wardlaw appears to use the term world for men of all nations, for by far the greater part of the world never heard of the boon, and consequently, could not be saved by the mission and mediation of the Son of God; but is there, on this account, the slightest surmise against the God of heaven, who declares that those who sin without law, shall perish without law? If the Saviour’s mission were an act of pure grace, although it has developed more of the glorious attributes of the Divine character, it was not requisite to vindicate the condemnation of all Adam’s children; but there appears in the minds of many a latent notion that the condemnation of mankind in Adam was not altogether in accordance with the justice of God, and that our race had some shadow of claim that a way of escape should be provided. This is utterly inconsistent with just views of the Gospel.

Dr Wardlaw admits that, in reference to man’s salvation, “had there been no election, the scheme of salvation must have been altogether abortive, —an entire failure, —having no result;” but still the character of God, “as the God of mercy, infinite and everlasting,” would have been gloriously vindicated. Independently of election, it would have been as impossible for the all-wise and most gracious God to proclaim salvation to sinners of mankind through the blood of His Son, as for Him to lie.[§§§§§§§]  So far from exalting his character, it would have degraded it. He had created mankind in Adam; by rebellion all had come under the curse; their hearts were consequently filled with enmity against God, so that nothing short of a new creation could subdue their iniquities. They were without strength, —they were not, nor could they be, subject to the law of God; and, with regard to the Gospel, it is a stumbling-block and foolishness to every man in his natural state. It is the testimony of inspiration, that the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, —neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. By one Spirit are all believers baptized into the one body of Christ; he convinces them of sin, of righteousness, and of judgement. Till men are made partakers of the Spirit, they are dead. The work of the Spirit, Dr Wardlaw admits, is as essential to salvation as the Atonement, and yet he informs us, that without the salvation of an individual of the human race, God would have been glorified by the provision of a way of recovery of which no man could possibly have availed himself. I care not whether the impossibility were natural or moral; it was absolute, and this he admits when he says that without election the scheme of salvation would have been “altogether abortive—an entire failure—having no result.”

The eternal purpose of God; his choosing his people in Christ, is always kept in view in connexion with the plan of salvation. Such is the state of fallen man, that to address to him the “offers of pardoning mercy,” without securing their efficacy, would have been speaking to the deaf. And if this be viewed in connexion with the depth of the humiliation of the Son of God; his enduring the contradiction of sinners against himself; his sustaining the curse, while not one of those —in whose nature he had experienced such unutterable sufferings —escaped, and consequently, so far as they were concerned, this amazing preparation vanished in smoke —then I affirm, without fear of contradiction, that such a transaction, so far from vindicating the glory of the Divine character, would have tarnished it more awfully than if sin had been pardoned without the semblance of an Atonement. The strong man would still have kept his house; secure in the attachment of his subjects; the god of this world would have laughed to scorn all the “offers of pardoning mercy.” Jesus would have left the field of conflict, baffled and disappointed; and Satan would have retained every individual of the human race in hopeless bondage. But the Son of God came to destroy the works of the devil, and to bruise him under the feet of his brethren. He had counted the cost of plucking a multitude of the fallen race, which no man could number, as brands from the burning. Amidst the weakness which he had assumed, he knew that the Lord God would help him, and that therefore he should not be confounded, Is. l. 7. When he entered the battle-field, he beheld the trophies of his victory, —his brethren ransomed from the power of the grave, reflecting the glory of their covenant God and Father, and increasing immeasurably the happiness of the holy angels around the throne of God.

He came into our world to seek and to save that which was lost; he entered our prison-house; like Samson, he felt the pillars on which it rested; they were immovable as the throne of the Almighty. Our condemnation was based on the justice and truth of God. By offering himself a sacrifice in obedience to his Father’s will, he satisfied justice, and magnified the law which his people had violated; in virtue of his unity with those with whom he had taken part in flesh and blood, in him they endured the penalty which they had incurred, so that mercy and truth meet together, righteousness and peace mutually embrace; and in God’s dealings with the Church, we see that, while with God there is no variableness or shadow of turning, nothing shall be impossible.

The King whom God hath set upon his holy hill of Zion, is not, nor by possibility could have been, a titular king, —a king without subjects; they are as the drops of dew from the womb of the morning; they are as the sand of the sea-shore innumerable; and in them, through eternity, will He be glorified and admired. It is always dangerous for us to make suppositions of what God might have done; it is inconsistent with that reverence and holy fear which we ought to cherish toward our Creator; it is our wisdom to consider the “work of God,”—what he hath done, —and not to indulge in idle speculations about what might have taken place.

We have seen that fallen man is as incapable of believing the Gospel as of obeying the law; God never did, nor ever will save a sinner, by enabling him to obey the law. Without an Atonement, the salvation of a sinner is impossible, because God is just. The Atonement could only be made by God manifest in the flesh; of this we may be assured, for the all-wise God never employs greater means than are necessary to secure his object. Want of wisdom is as apparent in employing means greater than the emergency requires, as in employing means which prove inadequate.

Salvation is by faith in the Atonement, that it might be by grace. The believer may and does glory, but it is only in the Lord. Pardon and salvation through faith in Christ are proclaimed in the Gospel; and, by means its gracious, invitations, the ordained to eternal life are gathered in. For their sakes Jesus sanctified himself, that they might be sanctified through the truth. He was delivered for their offences, and raised again for their justification. They were given to him before the foundation of the world, and in his “book were all his members written, which, in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them,” and they shall all appear before God in Sion. Christ’s mystical body will then be complete; the redeemed shall all come in the unity of the faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ. In this amazing plan are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. The angels desire to look into it; eternity will not be too long for its investigation; it is a theme which can never be exhausted; the introduction of sin into the universe will never cease to redound to the glory of God, and consequently to the happiness of his obedient and intelligent creation.

But where shall we look for this surpassing wisdom in the system of the advocates of universal Atonement? The “Eden dispensation” proved “an entire failure;” the “Sinai experiment” also entirely failed; and then an innocent Being, suffered as an expedient to satisfy justice! This is described as an Atonement for all mankind, while it is applied only to the elect; and all perish who are not thus distinguished. This scheme vindicates neither the justice nor the truth of God; the penalty is not inflicted on the guilty, but an innocent Person suffers for the purpose of making a salutary impression on the subjects of the Divine government, while those who are chosen to eternal life are saved. Thus God is represented as doing two things which he declares are his abomination, —he justifies the wicked, and condemns the just, Prov. xvii. 15. Dr Wardlaw informs us, a guilty person can never become an innocent person; so that a guilty creature is justified by Him who cannot look upon sin, and the innocent Lamb of God endures his Father’s curse! Surely the statement of such a system is a sufficient refutation.

CHAPTER XIX.

Dr Wardlaw’s Observations on Justice, Considered.

Much is said in Scripture respecting the justice or righteousness of God. The Gospel is the revelation of this righteousness, and the mystery of the faith consists in mercy and truth meeting together, righteousness and peace kissing each other; in the great Substitute and Surety of the new covenant restoring what he took not away; so that in pardoning iniquity, and passing by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage, a more striking manifestation of Divine justice is given, than if all the race of Adam had perished. The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is revealed in the Gospel as merciful and gracious, long-suffering, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin, yet by no means clearing the guilty.

According to Dr Wardlaw, the province, or characteristic of justice, is that of “rendering to all their due" This definition is unobjectionable; but when he proceeds to describe and classify the different kinds of justice, his notions are arbitrary, confused, illogical, and erroneous. He speaks of vindictive, commutative, distributive, and public justice. Vindictive justice he dismisses, as not meriting the name of justice; and he is right in doing so, if the term vindictive be intended to express anything corresponding to that malignity by which men are sometimes actuated; at the same time, God describes himself as revenging, nay, he claims vengeance as his peculiar prerogative; and, as Dr Wardlaw substitutes the word punitive justice, it may be questioned whether much is gained by the change, more especially as the suggestion of the mean spirit of personal revenge, with other remarks of the same kind, in connexion with the Almighty, although employed for the purpose of being repelled, must be very revolting, and savours of irreverence. Great fear is due unto God; and such allusions, if made at all, require to be touched with holy awe and reverence. But it is on what he terms “the three descriptions of justice which remain,”—commutative, distributive, and public, that we shall make some remarks.

What a strange medley have we here! Are what are called the virtues in the code of ethics, capable of such divisions? What should we think of the distinction between public and private temperance? public honesty and private honesty, public truth and private truth? If such distinctions, with reference to the virtues, considered as affecting the character of men, be improper, how much more unbecoming are they in reference to the Divine character! To talk of commutative justice, distributive justice, and public justice, as constituting that righteousness which is the essential attribute of God, is a mode of speaking altogether unwarranted by the Scriptures. It may have a show of wisdom; but it is only calculated to darken counsel by words without knowledge. It is an attempt to bring the metaphysics of the schools to bear upon the doctrine of the Gospel, but it only tends to puzzle and puff up. It may perplex the simple; it may inflate the half-learned, but it will be deprecated by the experienced Christian, as bring calculated to lower and degrade the truth, as it is in Jesus, —as being directly opposed to the apostolic precept: “Beware, lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.”

The true end of the Atonement, according to Dr Wardlaw, and other writers who have adopted the novel view of the sacrifice of Christ, was the satisfaction of public justice. This is true, but not the whole truth. The publicity of justice is an accident, not an essential; publicity or privacy does not alter the quality of the action. We may talk of public virtue, and private virtue, but the publicity or privacy of virtue has nothing to do with its essence. It is true that the Atonement was a satisfaction to public justice, but it was also a satisfaction to justice in every mode of its existence, whether public or private; and those who attempt to make the distinction, involve themselves in a labyrinth of inextricable confusion.

When the same writer observes that the grand design of the Atonement is to “preserve unsullied the glory of the great principles of eternal rectitude,” he enunciates an important truth; but when he proceeds to represent the Atonement as a scheme for reconciling righteousness and mercy in the view of the creature, rather than in the sight of Him who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, who does not perceive the wide difference between such illogical metaphysical speculations, and the plain declarations of the word of God?

Justice is an essential attribute of God. It is impossible for him to surrender this, or any of his other perfections; and whether he be regarded as dwelling in the light to which no man can approach, or coming forth from the secret pavilion of his glory, to manifest himself to his creatures, he knows no shadow of turning, —he cannot deny himself. In the government of the universe, it was needful that his glory should shine forth in all its essential lustre. It was needful that his holiness should be transcribed in the precepts of the divine law. It was further necessary that the law should be sanctioned by promises and threatenings, and as the eternal rectitude of the Divine nature necessarily leads to the fulfilment of his declarations, righteousness and truth are inseparably connected.

The vindication of God’s truth and justice must have relation to those to whom, or before whom, he has spoken; but with this qualification it may safely be asserted, that his truth and justice must stand unsullied, without regard to any other being.

When man by transgression violated the holy law under which he was placed, a blow was aimed at the supremacy of God. But there is no wisdom, nor device, nor counsel, against the Most High; and the very act by which Satan strove to shake the pillars of his Maker’s throne, issued in a most illustrious manifestation of that which would have existed in the same degree, although there had been no creation. The incarnation of the only begotten Son was the means whereby, according to his good pleasure, the Most High has gathered “together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, even in him,” — “to the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places, might be known by the Church the manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternal purpose, which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

But while the glory of God is the chief end of creation, and is also the source of all true happiness in the creature, it is highly improper to speak of any of the works of God as if they were designed merely or chiefly as a display to be gazed at and admired by the creatures of his power. In all that is done by the Almighty, there is a substance, a reality, which repels the notion of a mere public display being the end of his proceedings. Those, therefore, have greatly erred, who would resolve the whole mystery of the wisdom, power, and love of God, comprised in the Atonement, into a design of making an impression upon his creatures, as if it were public justice only that demanded the death of Christ. The Atonement is, indeed, a wonderful manifestation of the righteousness, holiness, mercy, and truth of God; but the necessity of the Atonement did not result from the existence of any creature, with the exception of the transgressor. The eternal justice and truth of God imperatively demanded the punishment of the guilty: and had Adam stood alone, —the solitary creature of the Almighty, —the essential attributes and character of God, his intrinsic holiness, justice, and truth, would have rendered his doom inevitable, had not wisdom and mercy combined in devising a remedy, by the claims of justice and truth receiving full satisfaction in all their boundless extent. It is the will of God that his glory should be made known; but this glory is the manifestation of what actually exists. He reveals himself as just, because He is just; and his mighty works proclaim his boundless power, because He is omnipotent. Far be it, then, from those that love the Lord, to represent the Atonement as an expedient for the exhibition of public justice, instead of being an actual satisfaction made to the JUSTICE OF GOD.

Justice, it has been truly said, is the pillar of the universe. It is an essential attribute of Him who upholdeth all things by the word of his power. It is the rule of rectitude by which creation is governed. The impress of God’s character must be stamped on his works. It is impossible for the Most High to surrender the least of his adorable perfections, far less that He should compromise his justice, or suffer the dignity of this attribute to be disparaged or eclipsed, as must inevitably have been the case, if He had condescended to be guided in its exercise by the judgement of his creatures, and the consideration of the impression which his conduct would produce on their minds. All his dealings exhibit him as the First Cause and great End of all. “The Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works,” Psal. cxlv. 17; but He suffers none to say to him, What doest thou? He is not influenced by anything external, and requires implicit submission to whatever manifestation He is pleased to make of himself.

Dr Wardlaw represents commutative or commercial justice, as what subsists between a debtor and creditor, and proceeds to express his apprehension, that in the conceptions of those who dissent from his novel views of the Atonement, “there is a great deal too much of the principles of commutative or commercial justice —of the literal notion of debt and its payment.” Even at the outset, he stumbles in his description of what he thus designates commercial justice. He says, “In such transactions, —if the debt be paid, no matter whether by the debtor himself, or by a surety, the claim of justice is cancelled; the obligation is discharged.” True; but when it is added, “no room is left for the exercise of anything that bears the nature of grace, or free favour” we demur. Nothing, indeed, has been remitted, —the full amount has been paid. But supposing the surety to have been provided by the kindness of the creditor, who, although he could not in justice to his own sense of duty, remit the debt, yet from compassion for his debtor, provided a third party to discharge the obligation; we should see that in the transaction there had been great room for the exercise of free favour on the part of the creditor, and gratitude on the part of the debtor.

It is true, that sins are called debts, rather in a figurative than a literal sense, but it is a figure much employed in the word of God, and one to which we do well to take heed, as the symbol by which the Holy Spirit has judged fit to convey to our feeble apprehensions, the great mystery of the Church, being Christ’s purchased possession, bought with his blood, and redeemed from the bondage of Satan.

All figurative language, and symbolical illustrations, even when found in Scripture, are to be used cautiously, but let us beware how we reject the truth which they express. It is true, as Dr Wardlaw says, that the wages of sin is death; and “that there is a material difference between the cancelling of a debt on payment of it by a surety, and the forgiveness of an on account of a propitiation.” But when he adds, “A debt of property may be paid by another; a debt of obedience never can—it is in its very nature intransferable —he not only begs the whole question in dispute, but directly opposes the uniform doctrine of Scripture.

Again, he tells us “a sinful creature may become a sinless creature. There may be an entire change of his nature. But a guilty creature cannot become an innocent creature.” A more direct contradiction of the word of God we have seldom met with. That the people of God were guilty, will not be disputed; but God who will by no means clear the guilty, has pronounced them righteous; and who shall disannul his judgement? They are taught to say, it is God that justifieth; who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died. Being washed, they are whiter than snow, Ps. li. 7. They are made the righteousness of God in Christ. If one particle of guilt adhered to them, He who cannot look upon sin, would not regard them; but in his all-seeing eye, they are “all fair, there is no spot in them.” Yet Dr Wardlaw tells us, “a guilty creature can never become an innocent creature!” The Apostles’ preaching, then, was vain, and our faith is vain; we are yet in our sins.

Dr Wardlaw proceeds — “That which has been done can never be undone; and that which has been deserved by the doing of it, can never cease to be deserved. No substitution, —no atonement, can in this respect alter the nature of things.” This is not the doctrine of Scripture. When the iniquity of God’s people is sought for, it shall not be found, it is buried in the depths of the sea. Many things are impossible with men, but with God all things are possible. The wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom consists in this, that “the debt of obedience” is paid actually, not figuratively by our great Surety, as fully as if it had been a debt of property; that our guilt is as effectually covered with the robe of Christ’s righteousness, as if it had never existed, and that believers have fulfilled the law in all its length and breadth, so that with adoring admiration of Him who hath loved them, and washed them from their sins in his own blood, they dare challenge the universe to lay anything to their charge. Is this the language of those who have been, and ever must be, guilty? Once more they shall be presented holy, and unblamable and unreprovable in the sight of God. But, according to Dr Wardlaw, although pardoned, they can never “cease to be guilty!”

It is by regarding the relative position of God and man without a Mediator, that Dr Wardlaw has fallen into error. All that he alleges against commutative or commercial justice might be true, were it not for the unity of Christ and his people, in consequence of his taking part with them in flesh and blood, so that they are not only members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones, but one with him, as he is one with the Father. It was not another who appeared as their surety; it was the Head of the body of which they are the members; and the unity of the head and the members of the natural body is not more real than that of Christ and his people.

This is the mystery of the faith. It may elude the grasp of human intelligence; it may be one of those things into which the angels desire to look; but the fact is certain. “HE HATH SAID IT,” and instead of perplexing ourselves about the properties of commutative or commercial justice, it will be our wisdom to bow with adoring humility to the unfathomable wisdom of God, and receiving, as little children, the truth as it is in Jesus, to learn the meaning of Christ’s words, —“I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to babes; even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight.”

Dr Wardlaw’s objections to what he terms commercial justice, are equally applicable to distributive justice. Accordingly, he states that distributive or retributive justice “admits not of substitution,” and that “every man personally must have his own due. But in substitution it is otherwise. There is an inversion of the principles of strict retribution. Neither Christ nor the sinner has his own due. The guilty, who, according to these principles, should suffer, escapes; and the innocent, who should escape, suffers.” Such is Dr Wardlaw’s view of substitution; it inverts the principles of justice, and substitutes a phantom, which, after all, he does not scruple to term public justice, by which “judgement is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off; for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter,” Is. lix. 14.

If this statement were correct, it would prove that, so far from the Gospel being the revelation of God’s righteousness, he had altogether abandoned his attribute of justice. In this case, justice, instead of receiving satisfaction, was, by the substitution of an innocent victim, buried under a load of accumulated ignominy. Such is not the doctrine of the word of God, which teaches us, “that he who justifieth the wicked, and he who condemneth the just, even they both are an abomination to the Lord.” Dr Wardlaw’s distorted view arises, on the one hand, from viewing the redeemed as standing separate from Christ, and, on the other hand, viewing the Lamb of God, in the dignity of his person, separate from his body the Church. But when we take into account the perfect unity of Christ and his people, —that in virtue of this unity he was wounded for their transgressions, —that the Lord laid on him the iniquity of them all, then we see the problem solved, —righteousness triumphant in the death of the Son of God, and the consequent salvation of the redeemed. We see the sword of justice bathed in the blood of a victim infinite in the dignity of his person, and glorious in the holiness of his nature, but made in the likeness of sinful flesh, clothed with the garment of humanity, and voluntarily laden with the guilt of myriads, which he has so fully cancelled, that God remembers their sins no more.

Very different is the doctrine of our old divines from what is fashionable among many modem theologians. “How,” says the venerable Charnock, “could he die, if he were not a reputed sinner? Had he not first had a relation to our sin, he could not in justice have undergone our punishment. He must, in the order of justice, be supposed a sinner, really or by imputation. Really he was not; by imputation then he was.” The justice of this imputation rests upon his unity with his people. “Both he that sanctifieth, and they that are sanctified, are all of one.” It is this unity of Christ and his members that solves all the difficulties which carnal wisdom interposes between us and the clear perception of the truth as it is in Jesus. When Christ became one with his people, their guilt became his, as the debts of the wife become by marriage the debts of the husband. The Lamb’s wife contracted the debt, —incurred the curse of the law; but the Lord, in obedience to the will of his Father, by his voluntary union with her, and with the fullest view of all its consequences, assumed the whole responsibility, and justice required of him the endurance of the penalty.

Those who apprehended Jesus in the garden were the ministers of justice, although they knew not what they did. He inquired, “Whom seek ye? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. — If therefore ye seek me, let these go away.” The sword awoke against the Shepherd; the wolf had entered the fold; but he was baffled and disappointed; the prey was taken from the mighty, and the lawful captive delivered, by the good Shepherd giving his life for the sheep.

The wages of sin is death. In Him who died for all, all died, 2 Cor. v. 14. The hand-writing of ordinances that was against us, —which was contrary to us, —is thus taken out of the way, and nailed to his cross, an imperishable memorial of the manifold wisdom of God, who, while he has plucked an innumerable multitude of guilty sinners as brands from the burning, has given a more awful display of his unsullied justice than when he cast the rebel angels into ever-lasting chains under darkness, reserving them to the judgement of the great day.

By the same train of reasoning which Dr Wardlaw employs respecting substitution, he might prove that good is evil, and evil good. He admits the substitution of Christ for his people, but then he tells us, in substitution “there is an inversion of the principles of strict retribution.” Now, let there be the same inversion of the principles of good and evil, and they become convertible terms.

In the whole of Dr Wardlaw’s reasoning upon this subject, we see the evil of introducing distinctions to which there is nothing analogous in the word of God. We there read much of God’s justice, but we nowhere find it divided into public and private. Justice is one, —the principle is ever the same, —although it is necessarily modified by circumstances in its application. Justice requires a pecuniary debt to be discharged; it also peremptorily awards punishment to the guilty. The principle in both cases is the same. He who is most just, —the fountain of justice and of every other perfection, —provided a Substitute for a multitude of the lost and ruined and guilty sons of men. He tells us they are healed with his stripes—that through his obedience unto death they are all righteous; and he commands all who hear the Gospel to trust in his finished work, with the assurance of acceptance. Dr Wardlaw thinks many are led into error by not attending to the difference of God considered as a Sovereign and as a moral Governor. The Scriptures represent him as both, and there is not the slightest interference between the one and the other; but they caution us against being wise above what is written. They tell us that God dwelleth in the thick darkness, —that it is his glory to conceal a thing, Prov. xxv. 2; and that the heirs of the kingdom, while in this world, must walk by faith, not by sight.

It was God’s purpose to bow down the haughtiness of men, to make foolish the wisdom of this world. Hence, there are many things too high for us, so that we can enter into the kingdom of God only by receiving it as a little child. When, in illustrating the glorious character of God exhibited in the works of creation and providence, and still more fully and explicitly in the Gospel, we resort to distinctions of which the Scripture affords no example, we may be assured we are only darkening counsel by words without knowledge; we are agitating untaught questions, which only tend to bewilder and mislead us. It is a matter of fact plainly declared, that Christ, who knew no sin, was made sin for those who were given him of the Father, and that they are made the righteousness of God in him. Hence, he is called the “Lord our righteousness,” and of this righteousness the Gospel is the revelation. So far from interfering with the principles of his moral government, it demonstrates that judgement and justice are the habitation of his throne, while mercy and truth go before his face. At the same time, it gives the clearest proof of his sovereignty in the election obtaining salvation, while the rest are blinded.

Those who maintain that the good Shephard laid down his life for the sheep, —that he purchased the Church with his own blood, do not rest their faith on metaphysical subtilties, but upon the plain declarations of Scripture. They are aware that many expressions are made use of which may, with some plausibility, be interpreted as being favourable to universal Atonement; but, by the same process, universal salvation, and other sentiments, manifestly opposed to the truth, may be defended. Take, for example, Rom. v. 15, where we are taught, that through the offence of one the many are dead, and that the gift by grace hath abounded to the many. The first many evidently includes all mankind; and, it may be argued, that the same words in the last clause must mean the same thing. So in verse 18, judgement came upon all men to condemnation, and the free gift came upon all men to justification of life. Again, verse 19. “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners; so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.” Here the many are made sinners, and the many are made righteous. These verses afford a much stronger argument for universal salvation than any passage which can be adduced for universal Atonement; but the doctrine of universal salvation is so repugnant to the whole tenor of Scripture, that such general expressions do not, in the slightest degree, affect the minds of those who tremble at the word of God; while, at the same time, they guard us against being misled by similar language in reference to other subjects. As to Rom. v. 15—19, it is capable of a simple explanation, in accordance with the universal testimony of the word of God, by observing, that the Apostle is contrasting all the family of Adam with all the family of Christ.

The advocates of universal Atonement, finding they, must be worsted by a direct appeal to the word of God, introduce metaphysical distinctions, by which the hearts of the simple are deceived; and the truth, of Christ having redeemed his people with his own blood, by appropriating and cancelling their guilt, is changed into an expedient for upholding the honour of the Divine government, so that the guilty escape through the sufferings of the innocent, and not even the shadow of justice is preserved.

Dr Wardlaw informs us, that, “according to the requisition of justice, in its distributive sense, every man personally must have his own due.” Now, that every man must have his own due, is a requisition not of distributive only, but of every kind of justice. If his due be not rendered to each individual, justice is not, in any sense, done. According to Dr Wardlaw’s scheme, every principle of justice is violated in the plan of redemption,—for the innocent suffers while the guilty escapes; and in the contemplation of this revolting system, we are to be satisfied by being told, that it is only distributive justice which gives every man his due; that “public justice” only requires “the palpable and visible endurance ” of suffering, and that “ the spectacle of a Saviour thus dignified, thus suffering, is enough for the purpose of salutary impression.” Justice, then, has nothing to do with the uprightness of the Divine administration. It is only necessary to make a “salutary impression.” In short, the work of Christ was all for the sake of appearance; and the essential justice of God is wholly lost sight of, or rather, is represented as having no positive existence.

The Scriptures assert that Christ, who knew no sin, was made sin, and endured the curse; the believer is made the righteousness of God in him, and inherits a blessing. The substitute stands in the place of his principal, else he is no substitute. Dr Wardlaw tells us, “distributive, or, as other designate it, retributive justice,[********] according to its strict requirements, admits not of substitution. It issues a righteous law with a righteous sanction. It passes its sentence of condemnation against the transgressor of that law. It makes no mention of any possible satisfaction, but the punishment of the guilty themselves, —the endurance by them of the penal sanction in their own persons. It is only by the death of the sinner himself, that the proper demand of the law can be fulfilled; that the principles of distributive justice can have their due application; and that, under this aspect of it, consequently, justice can be satisfied.” Is not the administration of justice necessarily distributive in the Divine government? If God be a moral Governor, he must of necessity give every man “his own due;” and his manifold wisdom consists in carrying out this principle in a way that far exceeds the thoughts of men and angels, by providing, not a nominal, but a real Substitute, in whom the guilty were actually punished, and endured the penal sanction of God’s holy law; but, according to Dr Wardlaw, distributive justice could not be “satisfied by substitution, when its demands, instead of being adhered to and fulfilled, are, for a special purpose, and by an act of Divine sovereignty, suspended, superseded, overruled.” By what kind of justice is this process effected? Divine sovereignty suspends, supersedes, overrules the demands of the law; but what, in the meantime, becomes of the justice and truth of God? Oh says the Doctor, I am not speaking of distributive justice; it required the death of the offender, and could be satisfied with nothing else, —it was “suspended, superseded, overruled. It is well to remark, however, that, in another sense, it was satisfied; all its ends being virtually, and to the full, effected by other means.” What, may we ask, was satisfied? Certainly not distributive justice; that is to say, justice was not administered; for “it is only by the death of the sinner himself, that the proper demands of the law can be fulfilled, that the principles of distributive justice can have their due application, and that under this aspect of it, consequently, justice can be satisfied.”

To distribute justice means, to administer it; and every righteous government must be conducted on the principle of distributive justice. The principle laid down by Dr Wardlaw is utterly subversive of justice. It proceeds upon grounds which would vindicate the most iniquitous proceeding, provided the government could contrive to impress its subjects with the persuasion, that it had acted properly, or, as Dr Wardlaw expresses it, make “a salutary impression” on the public mind. This would completely change the character of the wrong of which it had been guilty. True, distributive justice would be trampled on; but then public justice, which means, making a salutary impression, would be secured. This principle would extend farther. A man may overreach his neighbour, but, provided he can conceal the fraud of which he has been guilty, and impress upon his dupe, as well as others, the idea that he has acted properly, all is well. There was, indeed, no private honesty in his conduct, but then he contrived to hide the wrong that he had done so skilfully, that his character is raised, not injured, by the transaction; and instead of lowering the standard of public morals by his evil example, he has made it appear in a light worthy of imitation. All this might happen, but would it alter the nature of the wrong perpetrated, whether by the government or the individual?

Truly, according to Dr Wardlaw, so far from the Divine government being conducted on the principles of distributive justice, there has been “an inversion” of all which merits the name of justice; and the righteousness of God, which the Gospel professes to reveal, is no more than an expedient to make a salutary impression on the public mind.

Here Dr Wardlaw treads close upon Socinian ground, and while I do not suspect him of intending to set aside the Atonement, I hold that the Socinian, who denies that an Atonement was necessary, takes a less perverted view of the Divine character as revealed in the Scriptures of truth, than Dr Wardlaw, who discards God’s distributive justice as having any part in the plan of salvation, and restricts the sufferings of Jesus to the design of making a salutary impression on the universe. Both Dr Wardlaw and the Socinian admit that Christ died for sinners, —for their benefit. The latter holds, that by his death he proved the truth of his doctrine, and left us an example. Dr Wardlaw maintains, that his death was designed to make a salutary impression on our minds. But in neither scheme do we find the doctrine of the word of God, —that he died to expiate the guilt of his people, who, in virtue of his sacrifice, shall stand unreprovable before God.

All barbarous nations act upon the principle of public, in opposition to distributive, or retributive, justice; consequently, on Dr Wardlaw’s principles, they approximate more to the principles of the Divine government than nations which, in consequence of greater civilization, proceed upon the principle of giving every man his due. To this principle of public justice, the lamented Williams was sacrificed at Erromango. A ship had touched at the island some time before his arrival, and in a scuffle with the natives, some of them were slain. The ship in which Williams sailed happened to be the next that visited the island. As soon as she appeared, preparations were made for maintaining the rights of “public justice.” When the boat was approaching the shore, the women were sent into the bush; and no sooner did Williams and his companion land, and proceed a little way, than they were attacked and murdered. No doubt the Erromangians intended to make a salutary impression upon white men. Their government had been “endangered” by the violence of the Europeans; and had not this outrage been punished, it would have been “destroyed.” Had a chief stood up and said, This is not the same ship, —these people had no share in the murder of our countrymen, he would have been immediately silenced by the question, Are you not aware that the government of Erromango is not conducted on the principle of distributive, or retributive, but of public justice, which imperatively demands the death of the white man, for the purpose of making a salutary impression on the public mind? It will teach white men that our territory is not to be violated with impunity; and thus the honour of Erromango will be secured.[††††††††]

What does it avail that Dr Wardlaw admits, that “the Bible is full” of Atonement by sacrifice, in other words, by substitution and vicarious suffering,” if “in substitution there be an inversion of the principles of strict retribution?” Yes, verily, according to his scheme, there is a most wonderful inversion; the innocent substitute suffers, and the guilty principal escapes; and thus an indelible impression is made on the mind of every intelligent creature, that while God’s absolute sovereignty may not be resisted, the ways of the Lord are not equal, and that mercy and truth, righteousness and peace, are NOT united in the plan of salvation, by the incarnation and sufferings of the Son of God. According to the word of God, the Just suffered for the unjust, but not until he had so united himself with the children whom God had given him, that their sin was his sin, so that he was justly responsible.

In concluding these remarks upon Dr Wardlaw’s theory of “public justice,” I may observe, that I know nothing comparable to it, with the exception of the following theory of “PUBLIC CONSCIENCE.”

“Bishop Parker affirms, That unless princes have power to bind their subjects to that religion they apprehend most advantageous to public peace and tranquility, and restrain those religious mistakes that tend to its subversion, they are no better than statues and images of authority. That in cases and disputes of public concernment, private men are not properly sui juris; they have no power over their own actions; they are not to be directed by their own judgements, or determined by their own wills, but by the commands and the determination of the PUBLIC CONSCIENCE; and that if there be any sin in the command, he that imposed it, shall answer for it, and not I, whose whole duty it is to obey. The commands of authority will warrant my obedience; my obedience will hallow, or at least, excuse my action, and so secure me from sin, if not from error; and in all doubtful and disputable cases, ’tis better to err with authority, than to be in the right against it. That it is absolutely necessary to the peace and happiness of kingdoms, that there be set up a more severe government over men’s consciences and religious persuasions, than over their vices and immoralities; and that princes may with less hazard, give liberty to men’s vices and debaucheries, than to their consciences.”

CHAPTER XX.

Remarks on Some Passages of Dr Jenkyn’s Work.

DR JENKYN views the ATONEMENT as “an expedient substituted in the place of the literal infliction of the threatened penalty, so as to supply to the government just and good grounds for dispensing favours to an offender.”[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡]

This accords with Dr Wardlaw’s “public justice” and “salutary impression,” to which we have already attended; but we would ask Dr Jenkyn, if the “threatened penalty” were not inflicted, what becomes of the Divine veracity, and how can there be just grounds of dispensing with infliction of punishment, when the law has been broken? If this view were correct, then might Satan boast that he spoke truth when he affirmed, Ye shall not surely die.

Dr Jenkyn proceeds to illustrate his definition by two instances; the one borrowed from the Holy Scriptures, the other from profane history. The first is that of Darius, who had condemned Daniel to the den of lions.

It seems “no expedient could be found which would at once preserve the honour of the government, and allow the exercise of clemency towards the offender.” Why not? It is true, if the law were not to be violated, and the king’s veracity —in the decree which he had promulgated, —were to be held sacred, it was impossible that Daniel should escape. But if Darius could have been satisfied with an ”expedient” which would have produced a salutary impression upon his subjects, showing them that it was a very serious thing to disregard the commands of the king; there was no impossibility in the matter.

The decree was express, —the law was unchangeable; but, according to Dr Jenkyn, although the law of God is equally express, it might be set aside, and justice satisfied by the expedient of the sufferings of an innocent person. This he considers “an honourable ground or medium for expressing” mercy. Hence it would appear that the Divine law is more pliable than that of the Medes and Persians, and the word of Darius more sacred than that of Him who is not a man that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent.

The conduct of Zaleucus, in submitting to the loss of an eye to prevent his son from losing both, is represented as similar to the substitution of Christ. In this case truth and justice were equally trampled on, and the law, instead of being magnified and made honourable, was held up to mingled hatred and contempt. The punishment denounced against adultery was total blindness, but the son of Zaleucus escaped with the loss of one eye. Not only was truth violated in his not undergoing the threatened punishment, but justice was doubly outraged by the father suffering for the crime of the son, in which he had no participation. And shall such exhibitions of barbarian ignorance and vanity be employed to illustrate the unfathomable depth of the Divine wisdom in the plan of redemption! The loss of the father’s eye afforded neither “just nor good grounds” for the son escaping with half the threatened punishment. It doubly violated justice by clearing the guilty and punishing the innocent. Truth was also sacrificed, for the threatened penalty was not inflicted. In short, the whole affair exhibits a picture of the crooked notions of justice prevalent among the heathen, who had not heard of the divine commandment, that “the fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: Every man shall be put to death for his own sin,” Deut. xxiv. 16.

Dr Jenkyn attempts to square the Bible with his philosophy; but he has yet to learn that the unity of Christ and his people is the foundation of the Atonement. Hence, he who knew no sin exclaims, “MINE iniquities have taken hold upon me, so that I am not able to look up; they are more than the hairs of mine head: therefore my heart faileth me,” Psal. xl. 12. This is by no means a solitary passage; we meet with many such in the book of Psalms, —a part of Scripture peculiarly valuable, because it admits us, as it were, into the Redeemer’s closet while he dwelt upon earth, and furnishes us with some idea of the meditations which possessed his soul when he passed whole nights upon the mount of Olives. Irrespective of the unity of Christ and his people, he could have made no Atonement for them, for he that sanctifieth, and they that are sanctified, must be all of one.

Again —Dr Jenkyn tells us, “The substitution of Christ was twofold, —a substitution of his person instead of the offenders; and a substitution of his sufferings instead of their punishment. By this substitution is meant a voluntary engagement to undergo for the ends of Divine government, degradation, trouble, reproach, and sufferings, in order that the penalty threatened by the law may not be executed on the offenders. Such a substitution implies no transfer of moral character, no commutation of delinquency and responsibility; for the nature of things makes such a transfer and commutation impossible. This substitution of suffering also excludes the idea of a literal infliction upon the substitute of the identical penalty due to the offender,” pp. 35, 36.

Here we have the anomaly already adverted to, —the penal sufferings of an innocent person, — “that the penalty threatened by the law may not be executed on the offenders.” Such a transaction never did, nor by possibility ever could, take place under the righteous government of God. “Whoever perished being innocent? or when were the righteous cut off?” Christ was smitten for the iniquities of God’s people, but not till he had become one with them. Dr Jenkyn tells us, there was “no commutation of delinquency and responsibility, for the nature of things makes such a transfer and commutation impossible.” But the things which are impossible with men, are possible with God; and the Scripture teaches us that Christ, who knew no sin, was made sin for his people, that they might be made the righteousness of God in him. Here is that transfer and commutation which the Doctor pronounces to be impossible. He is more attached to metaphysical reasoning than to the dictates of the lively oracles. “The identical penalty due to the offenders” was death; it was endured by their Substitute, and, in him, by all whom he represented, and thus their guilt was expiated.

Dr Jenkyn observes, that the death of Christ is never connected with “private feelings of attachment, but always with the public principle of government.” This is a very extraordinary assertion. He on all occasions expressed the strongest feelings of attachment to his people; “greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends,” and his example is held out as a model for us. “Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren,” 1 John iii. 16. Surely this is very closely connected with private feelings of attachment.

Dr Jenkyn’s unscriptural views of the Atonement are clearly seen in his assertion that, while “the sinner rejects the Lord that bought him and atoned for him, he is still liable to the curse of the law; and if he die impenitent, the curse of the law will be inflicted on him, notwithstanding the Atonement made for his sin,” p. 39. That any of those for whom the Atonement was made should die impenitent, is impossible; they are redeemed from the curse of the law. By the Atonement their guilt is expiated, and guilt alone cuts off the creature from the love and favour of God, and prevents his hearkening to the invitations of mercy. The sheep for whom the good Shepherd laid down his life, shall never perish, but have eternal life; they are dead to the law by the body of Christ, and the law is the strength of sin; where there is no law, there is neither transgression nor guilt. Why shall none lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? because Christ hath died, yea, rather is risen again, and is seated at the right hand of God to make intercession for them. What is the cause of the sinner’s enmity against God—of his hatred of the light? it is his guilt and condemnation, his being cut off from God by the curse of the broken law. But when his guilt is expiated by him who was delivered for his offences, and was raised again for his justification, nothing can prevent the Lord from taking possession of the purchase of his blood, delivering him from the power of Satan, and making him willing, in a day of power, to take upon him the Saviour’s easy yoke. Hence, it is written, “God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life,” Rom. v. 8—10. The sins of those for whom Christ suffered are purged; Jesus suffered without the gate, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, as Israel was separated from all nations by the blood of the Sinai covenant. The elect were reconciled to God by the death of his Son; full satisfaction was made for them, and as, when the holy places were reconciled by the appointed sacrifices, 2 Chron. v. 6, the Lord took possession of his habitation, 2 Chron. v. 13, 14, so is it with regard to the redeemed who, in the day of regeneration, become the temple of the living God, 2 Cor. vi. 16, Eph. ii. 22.

Dr Jenkyn observes, that “a limited Atonement is inconsistent with the truths embodied in the typical representations which shadowed forth the character and extent of the Atonement of Christ.” The first illustration of this remark is “the divine ordinance of sacrifice,” which he tells us “was as open and accessible to Cain, and as available for him, as it was in the case of Abel.” This would be a good argument against those who object to the indiscriminate publication of the Gospel to sinners of mankind; but it does not bear upon the question of the extent of the Atonement. The Divine ordinance of sacrifice was the Gospel of Christ in a figure. Abel, who was of the seed of the woman, looked for the mercy of the promised Saviour unto eternal life, and by faith offered a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, —the seed of the serpent, to whom the divine ordinance of shedding blood upon God’s altar was foolishness. Yet God condescended to reason with him, and to point out the folly of his conduct, as he continues to do by the warnings and exhortations contained in his word, to such of the seed of the serpent as come under the sound of the Gospel.

Again, he tells us God acted upon the same general principle “towards the antediluvians in the provision of an ark for their safety. The aspect of this expedient was of a universal character. All were invited to come into the ark, and its rejecters are blamed for not seeking safety in it,” p. 260. The Scripture tells us that Noah prepared an ark to the saving of his house, Heb. xi. 7. God informed him that the flood of waters which He was about to bring upon the earth should destroy “all flesh wherein was the breath of life, and everything that is in the earth shall die; but with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shall come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons’ wives with thee,” Gen. vi. 18. So much for this expedient being of a universal character. It was plainly declared to be an “expedient” for the preservation of Noah and his family, with the exception of whom God declares “the end of all flesh is come before me.” We nowhere read that any one was “invited or pressed,” or even suffered to come into it. The ark was prepared for a specific purpose, and this purpose was accomplished; Noah and his house were preserved. The Scripture “speaks nothing” of men being “condemned for not being saved in the ark,” or that “Noah’s ministry” was “concerning the ark.” The world was condemned by the faith of Noah respecting the flood, and his faith was shown by his preparing the ark, not to the saving of the world, but to the saving of his house; while their unbelief was proved by their eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, regardless of the impending catastrophe of which so long warning had been given.

From the age of the world, men must have been scattered abroad upon the earth, and probably comparatively few heard of the ark. When it is said Noah condemned the world, the expression is used precisely as it was by the unbelieving relatives of the Lord Jesus, — “If thou do these things, show thyself to the world” John vii. 4. They meant that he should go into Judea, that his disciples might see the works that he did, ver. 3; —that he should deliver his discourses, and perform his miracles, in a more open and public manner. But without entering upon the inquiry how many or how few heard the preaching of Noah, which it is impossible for us to ascertain, we know that the ark was prepared for the preservation of Noah’s house, because he had found “grace in the eyes of the Lord,” and the Lord had established his covenant with him. Hence, this typical representation which shadowed forth the character and extent of the redemption of Christ, perfectly corresponds with what is prefigured. Noah, with whom God had established his covenant, was preserved with his family, while an ungodly world perished in their iniquity. And, in exact correspondence with this, through the Atonement of Christ, the great Head of the covenant, Is. xlix. 8, the children of God who are scattered abroad, shall be gathered together in one.

Dr Jenkyn next refers to the sacrifice of Noah when he came out of the ark. By God’s commandment, every clean beast, and fowl, had been taken into the ark by sevens, and after the flood, Noah builded an altar, and offered a burnt offering of the seventh of each kind, which had been reserved for this purpose. The sacrifice being the ordinance of God, met with the Divine approbation, and He not only declared that he would not again destroy the world by a flood, but set his bow in the cloud as the token of the covenant. The world, although secure against another flood of waters, is reserved unto fire, 2 Pet. iii. 7; but it shall remain till all the sheep of Christ are brought into his fold. The angel could do nothing till Lot had reached a place of safety, Gen. xix. 22; and, in like manner, the doom of the world is suspended till all who have found grace in the eyes of the Lord —his people —his inheritance —have been collected in the true ark, and have reached the true city of refuge. If men are to live in the world, there must be “seed time and harvest,” and consequently, these shall continue to the end. But all things are for the elect's sake; they are the salt of the earth; and were it not for this remnant, the earth would long ere now have been as Sodom and Gomorrah. Hence, we see that the covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh, including the fowl and the cattle, and every beast of the earth, Gen. ix. 10, has no bearing upon the universality of the Atonement, which we presume Dr Jenkyn does not consider as extending to every beast of the earth, although we doubt not he has read of one who, on the strength of the commandment to preach the Gospel to every creature, addressed it to beasts and fishes.

Dr Jenkyn seems to think that the Apostle refers to Noah’s sacrifice in Eph. v. 2. He tells us “that it is through this true sacrifice that every blessing comes to our world. It is in Christ that God reconciles the world to himself, without dealing with it according to its sins,” p. 261. But why does he alter the words of inspiration? “God does not impute their trespasses” to the world, which he reconciles to himself, 2 Cor. v. 19. The Apostle is speaking of the new world, the new creation composed of the nations of them which are saved, Rev. xxi. 4, 5.

He is not more fortunate in his remarks on the brazen serpent. It is very extraordinary, that from its being lifted up by Moses for the benefit of Israel in the midst of a desolate wilderness where no man dwelt, any one should attempt to found an argument for the universality of the Atonement of Christ. True, it is said “that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it shall live;” but it was everyone in Israel for whom alone it was lifted up, and who alone could possibly see it. Dr Jenkyn tells us, that the Lord “considered this provision as an illustration of the extent of his own atonement,” and no doubt it is so; the serpent was lifted up exclusively for the benefit of the nation of Israel, and by means of the antitype, the true Israel are gathered out of every nation. As everyone who was bitten in Israel was healed by looking on the serpent, so everyone throughout the world who believes in the Son of God shall live.

The last illustration employed by Dr Jenkyn, is the annual expiation on the day of atonement. Having quoted the words of the institution, he says, “these sacrifices of the Jews were related to them all, —were designedly offered up for all, and were truly available to all.” Who doubts it? But what has this to do with the universality of the Atonement? Of whom were the Jews a figure? of all mankind, or of the true Israel? The kingdom of God was established in that nation; they were its subjects by birth, but “it was taken from them, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof: the subjects of the kingdom of God are those who are born of God, who, being Christ’s are Abraham’s seed. They are the children of the new covenant, and the great sacrifice by which it was ratified, relates to them all, —was offered up for them all, —and is truly available to them all. The altar erected in Israel was for all; and the Apostle speaks of the Christian altar as equally extensive for the benefit of himself and his Christian brethren, while others are excluded from the benefit: “We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle,” Heb. xii. 10.

Dr Jenkyn tells us “the atonement offered on the great day of annual expiation, was intended to take away all the iniquities of the children of Israel, Lev. xvi. 22. This the atonement would effectually accomplish to all those who, according to the arrangements of that atonement, afflicted their souls, and did no manner of work on that day. If it was offered designedly for all, will it not infallibly secure all its ends to all the tribes? No: for whatsoever soul it be that shall not be afflicted, (in contrition) in that same day he shall be cut off from among his people, and that, notwithstanding the atonement offered for him, Lev. xxiii. 29,” p. 265. Upon this we observe: The atonement was not designed to take away one of the sins of the children of Israel, “for it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sin,” Heb. x. 4. It was a figure for the time then present, shadowing forth the great Atonement to be made in the end of the world for the Israel of God, by which Christ hath forever perfected them that are sanctified. So the cutting off of the man who did not afflict his soul on that day, may be a figure of the destruction of those who neglect the great salvation, who tread underfoot the Son of God, disregarding the Atonement proclaimed by the Gospel; and thus prove that they have neither part nor lot in this matter.

In treating of “the truths embodied in the typical representations which shadowed forth the character and extent of the redemption of Christ,” Dr Jenkyn might also have referred to “the passover and sprinkling of blood.” The redemption of Israel from Egypt was a figure of the redemption of the true Israel from spiritual bondage, consequently the passover was appointed for Israel alone; but not more palpably so than the sacrifice on the great day of atonement, and the daily sacrifices, or the brazen serpent, or than the ark for Noah’s house. The design of all was limited. The Apostle says, “Christ, our passover, was sacrificed FOR US;” and this stands in immediate connexion with the commandment to put away a wicked person who appeared not to belong to the flock of Christ, and who was, therefore, not to be admitted to the feast, which was exclusively appointed for the people of God, in commemoration of Christ their passover having been sacrificed for THEM. “Every unprejudiced mind,” says Dr Jenkyn, “will see that it was as necessary for Christ to die, in order to justify the condemnation of sinners, as it was to justify the admission of saints to heaven under every dispensation,” p. 415. We have here a confirmation of the remark formerly made, that error, in regard to the Atonement, originates in not perceiving the state into which mankind were brought by the fall. All Adam's posterity were condemned in him, and surely their condemnation was just. To represent the death of Christ, then, as necessary, in order to justify the condemnation of sinners, is to deny the grace which provided the Saviour; it represents God as bound in justice to provide a Saviour for fallen man, which is opposed to every part of the Scriptures of truth. If it were necessary for Christ to die to justify the condemnation of sinners, how can the condemnation of the angels, —who kept not their first estate, and for whom no Saviour died, —be justified?

Both Dr Wardlaw and Dr Jenkyn set aside the attribute of Divine justice, and substitute the expedient of public justice, by which this glorious attribute is reduced to an illusion practised on the creation, by the sufferings of Christ being “substituted instead of the literal penalty due to sin, as a ground, or reason, for not inflicting on the sinner the sufferings due to him,” p. 414. Dr Jenkyn admits that “it is impossible to show how JUSTICE can inflict a punishment on the Substitute, while it is at the same time, and has been for ages, literally being executed upon the criminals themselves” ib.; but he thinks “this argument has force only on the hypothesis that Christ suffered the identical penalty due to sinners.” But, to say nothing of justice, what becomes of the TRUTH of God, if the “identical penalty,” by which God sanctioned his holy law, was not inflicted?

Dr Jenkyn informs us that the number of the saved “will far exceed the number of the lost,” p. 420. I know not by what part of the word of God this assertion is warranted. There shall indeed be a countless multitude, the trophies of the Redeemer’s power and grace; but Christ’s flock is always represented as a little flock, chosen out of the world. The way that leads to life is said to be strait and narrow, and is contrasted with the broad way that leadeth to destruction, into which many enter. Even in Israel there was only a very small remnant. But these crude imaginations are the natural fruits of the doctrine of universal Atonement. It is founded on false principles of reasoning; it is vindicated by the words which man’s wisdom teacheth; it infects every part of men’s views of the doctrine of Scripture; and naturally—I might almost say necessarily —leads to the doctrine of universal salvation, to which Dr Jenkyn’s system appears to approximate. When to the doctrine of universal Atonement, Dr Wardlaw’s tenet of God’s universal love to mankind, and his desire of their salvation, are added, it seems impossible, from such premises, to draw any other conclusion than the salvation of the whole human race.

Our author tells us, that “missionary institutions take for granted that Christ has died for heathens who never heard of his death.” The preaching of the Gospel in England is, no doubt, founded on the conviction that Christ died for heathens, for the proportion of Jews is small; but if any missionary institution founds its operations upon Christ having died for the whole, or any part of the inhabitants of a country to which their agents are sent, they require that someone should expound to them the way of God more perfectly. If their institution be founded in knowledge, they act in obedience to the commandment, Go “into all the world,” and preach the Gospel to “every creature.” It is said “When a missionary arrives among a heathen nation, he tells them, Jesus Christ died for you,” p.418. The Apostles had “no such custom; they kept within their commission, and preached salvation to all, through faith in Christ. Dr Jenkyn inquires. “Suppose he, (a missionary,) go to China instead of to India, would that circumstance imply that Christ had died for the Chinese, but not for the people of India?” Certainly not. But those, and those only, (of course, I speak not of infants,) who call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved; and the Apostle asks, “How shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed, and how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard?” God has said, “My word shall not return unto me void,” so that wherever he opens a door for the publication of the Gospel, we have reason to suppose that he has people whom he intends to bring in. Paul was encouraged to labour at Corinth, because the Lord had much people there, Acts xviii. 10. We are told that “thousands are benefited by Providence, who did not know that it is the providence of God,” p. 416; true, but in order to receive providential benefits, it is not necessary to know whence they proceed, while to receive benefit from the Gospel, it is necessary that we believe in the Lord Jesus, and call upon his name.

Our author informs us, “a virtuous heathen” might be saved; but considerately adds, “wherever such can be found.” If we are guided either by the Apostle’s account of the heathen, Rom. i., or by actual experience, we shall have little hope of discovering such a character. But we are furnished with an example, — “Wherever there is a heathen Cornelius, he will be accepted before God, for the sake of a Saviour of whom he has not heard.” “A heathen Cornelius!” “A devout man,[§§§§§§§§] and one that feared God, with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway,” Acts x. 2. “A heathen Cornelius!” One of the very few saints in the Old or New Testament on whom the appellation just is bestowed by inspiration. “A heathen Cornelius!” One that feared God, and” of good report among all the nation of the Jews,” hostile as they were to the Gentiles, Acts x. 22. “A heathen Cornelius!” One whose prayers and alms had come up for a memorial before God, Acts x. 4. Not only had God put his fear into the heart of this heathen, but he knew of the word “which God sent to the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ, —after the baptism which John preached,” Acts x. 37. And is it thus that this devout soldier, this eminently just and liberal man, this distinguished saint, who feared God, and commanded the respect of a nation, —is it thus that this honoured servant of God is to be held up as an example of men being saved without faith? The Lord said of another heathen, “I have not found so great faith, no not in Israel.” Perhaps we shall next hear of the heathen Melchizedek, or the heathen Titus, for neither of these eminent servants of God were of the stock of Abraham.

The Apostle teaches us, that those who have sinned without law shall perish without law, and we are sure that, previously to the Ephesians receiving the Gospel, they were without Christ, having no hope, and without God in the world, Eph. ii. 12; they were sometimes far off, but were made nigh by the blood of Christ; in other words, they were saved by grace through faith, Eph. ii. 8.

During the Mosaic dispensation, it was not necessary to salvation that men should become Jews. Melchizedek was superior even to Abraham. Jethro was a worshipper of the true God. There were, no doubt, many in the days of Abraham who feared God; but to teach us that it is not of works, but of Him that calleth, an idolater was chosen to be the progenitor of Christ, and the father of all believers whether Jews or Gentiles; that in every age his children might look to the rock whence they were hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence they were digged.

CHAPTER XXI.

The Application of the Expressions of God’s Love for Israel to Mankind in General, One Source of the Error of Universal Atonement.

THE divine wisdom is very strikingly exhibited in the preparation made during four thousand years for the manifestation of the Son of God, and the establishment of his everlasting kingdom. It has been well observed, that the characteristic of the Old Testament is prophecy, that of the New fulfilment. Not only in the writings of the prophets, but in the events recorded, we have a representation of what was to come. Adam and Eve, —Cain and Abel, —the family of Cain and of Seth, —the preservation of Noah in the ark, —the determination of God to separate mankind, which, on their part, was obstinately resisted, were all prophetical of what was to happen. But as the most full and exact pattern of the kingdom of Christ was to be given in God’s dealings with the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the history of the world till the call of Abraham, is very rapidly sketched, although what is recorded is fraught with instruction.

Not only was Abraham constituted the progenitor of Christ, and the father of all believers, but salvation was entailed upon his family in the line of Isaac and Jacob, with whom, after Abraham's death, God established his covenant, —not that all the descendants of these eminent patriarchs should be saved, but that the heirs of salvation should inherit the blessing in virtue of their admission into that illustrious family. Abraham was justified by faith, Gen. xv. 6, not merely by believing that he was to have a numerous posterity, but that Christ, the Saviour of the world, should spring from his loins according to the original promise upon which God had caused him to hope, Gen. xii. 3. He had, however, waited long; he was far advanced in life, and had no child. Should he die childless, the promise could not be fulfilled. He who knows our frame, and remembers that we are dust, cheered his servant by assuring him he was his shield and exceeding great reward. God might have bestowed on him many favours, but his hopes were centred upon the one blessing which he had been taught to expect —the incarnation of the Saviour in his family. This was the covenant ordered in all things and sure: it was all his salvation and all his desire, as well as that of his descendant David. In his reply, therefore, to the Divine assurance of favour and protection, he intimated that upon this his heart was fixed, and that everything else was comparatively trifling, “And he brought him forth abroad, and said, look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. And he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness,” Gen. xv. 5, 6. Abraham's despondency was now removed, and in the promise he beheld the day of Christ, surrounded with an innumerable multitude of his brethren, who should all acknowledge the patriarch as their father.

It was the purpose of God to exhibit, in the history of the family of Abraham, a pattern of the everlasting kingdom which he was about to establish, and also, to give a representation of all the great doctrines of the Gospel. The foundation of all is election, whereby God, in the exercise of his holy sovereignty, has chosen his people out of the world, to be heirs of his everlasting kingdom. This was illustrated by the call of Abraham when serving other gods, and perhaps still more strikingly in the case of Jacob and Esau.

The nation of Israel was to be the type of the redeemed of the Lord, and for this end they were sent into Egypt, brought under cruel bondage, and delivered —not without shedding of blood —with a mighty hand, and a stretched forth arm. Moses was constituted their leader; and at the commencement of their journey, they were baptized unto him in the cloud, and in the sea, 1 Cor. x. 2. By following him through the sea, they professed their faith in him whom God had appointed their guide. In their journey to Canaan, they represented the true Israel. It is appointed that fallen man should eat bread in the sweat of his face; but the journey of Israel represented not the ordinary life of man, but the life of faith. The manna which they gathered day by day, and upon which they fed, was the emblem of the flesh of Christ, by eating of which the true Israel live. This is fully explained in our Lord’s discourse recorded in the sixth chapter of John. They also drank of that rock which followed them, and that rock was Christ, 1 Cor. x. 4. When smitten with the rod of the lawgiver, it gave forth water, a shadow for the time then present of the true Israel being redeemed from the curse of the law, by Christ being made a curse for them, and their receiving the Spirit through the Atonement made for their sins. It is remarkable that Moses died for smiting the rock a second time, when he had been commanded only to speak to it; —as if the one offering of Christ had not been sufficient for affording to believers ample supplies of the Spirit.

In the fall of the first generation in the wilderness, a solemn warning is given to those who name the name of Jesus, that he who endureth to the end shall be saved, and that as they could not enter Canaan because of their unbelief, we should fear lest a promise being left of entering into rest, any of us should seem to come short of it by not holding the beginning of our confidence stedfast to the end.

By the law given at Sinai, which was ratified with blood, Heb. ix. 20., the middle wall of partition was placed between Israel and all other nations; for by it they were exclusively brought into covenant with God. They were commanded utterly to extirpate the old inhabitants of the land; and their doing so imperfectly, was the principal cause of all the calamities they experienced. They were taught to trust in God alone for protection. Other nations might enter into confederacies for their mutual defence, but the eternal God was the refuge of Israel, and only in confiding in him were they safe.

Sufficient attention is not paid to a circumstance recorded in the history of Israel, respecting the covenant which God commanded Moses to make with them “in the land of Moab, besides that which he made with them in Horeb.” This covenant is recorded Deut. xxix. and xxx. After briefly recapitulating the Lord’s dealings with Israel, Moses reminds them that they were now to enter into covenant with God, they and their children. The tenor of the covenant was, that, in consequence of their turning away from God, the land should be laid desolate, and that, after having enjoyed the blessings promised, and experienced the threatenings denounced, when they should bethink themselves, and return to the Lord, they should be brought back to the land of their fathers, and the Lord would circumcise their heart, and the heart of their seed, to love him, that they might live. This is the new covenant, which is more particularly described by Jeremiah; and it is very remarkable that the Apostle, after quoting Moses as describing the righteousness of the law, “that the man that doeth these things should live in them,” Lev. xviii. 5, quotes from the covenant in the land of Moab a description of the righteousness of faith. “But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach: That if thou shalt confess with thy month the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, then shalt be saved,” Rom. x. 6—9. Here, as in other passages, we find the Apostle raising the vail of Moses, and showing us that he spoke of Christ. In the covenant in the land of Moab, Moses plainly foretold the consequences of the breach of the Sinai covenant, and the security which Israel should enjoy within the bond of the better covenant, which is more clearly developed by the Apostle, Rom. xi. 25—29.

David, the son of Jesse, who was at once the progenitor and type of Christ, was chosen by the Lord to be king in Israel. Both in his afflictions and subsequent triumphs over all his enemies, he was a striking figure of his descendant who was to sit as King upon God’s holy hill of Sion; and Solomon his son, in whose days Israel were favoured with such peace and quietness, was an emblem of the Prince of Peace, who gives peace to his people always by all means.

Had God’s chosen people enjoyed uninterrupted peace and prosperity, they would not have given a just representation of the true Israel, who are engaged in a constant struggle with those fleshly lusts which war against the soul, as well as with the calamities of life which are common to men; and therefore we find the history of Israel chequered with many afflictions, chiefly arising from their proneness to start aside from God like a deceitful bow. At length they were carried captive to Babylon, —an emblem of the bondage under which the man of sin has contrived to subject so many of the true Israel.

The Lord not only delivered by the hand of Moses statutes and judgements, by which his people were to be guided till the appearance of Messiah, but also raised up a succession of prophets, who both warned and reproved Israel for their departure from God, and foretold the coming of the Saviour, his rejection, and the consequent vengeance which should be inflicted on the nation. These predictions are mingled with the most earnest appeals, and the most affectionate expostulations respecting their ingratitude to their covenant God, from which the true Israel in every age derive much instruction and encouragement in their contest with the god of this world. In these addresses, we find, not only the most severe and merited reproofs, but the most affectionate protestations, and the most ample assurances, that God would not cast them off, but would do them good in their latter end. He had been pleased to make them his people, and he would never forsake them. Hence it is, that notwithstanding all their wickedness, their crucifying the Lord of Glory, their opposing by every means in their power the spread of the Gospel, and their continued blasphemy and unbelief, they are preserved distinct from the nations among whom they are scattered, and are yet to be restored to their own land, and to serve the true David their glorious King, under a better covenant than that of Sinai.

By the commandment of the everlasting God, the Gospel is now preached to every creature, and by means of it, men of all nations to whom the Gospel comes in the providence of God, are delivered from the power of darkness, and translated into the kingdom of his dear Son. No man is now known after the flesh; believers are the true circumcision. The kingdom of God, which is righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost, is established in the heart of every child of the new covenant, without respect of families or nations.

But while the Gospel is equally addressed to Jews and Gentiles, it does not follow that the Gentiles occupy the same place which the Jews did formerly. A believing Gentile is an Israelite indeed; but the Gentile nations are not in covenant with God like the nation of Israel. They have no promise of future benefits, excepting as individuals by receiving Christ; and therefore nothing can be more unscriptural and erroneous, than supposing that the Gentiles have come into the place of the Jews, and that therefore we may address them in the same language, as the prophets made use of to Israel of old. It is true that the greater part of those to whom the prophets were sent, were ungodly, treasuring up wrath for themselves against the day of wrath. Still they belonged to that nation which the Lord claimed as his own; and although those who continued in unbelief, no doubt perished as well as Gentile sinners, yet they were a privileged people, standing in a peculiar relation to God as their covenant God; and, previously to their rejection, were addressed in a manner which is applicable to no other nation. Hence also the Gospel was first preached to them, and it is the power of God unto salvation to the Jew first.

The wisdom of God is exhibited, by provision being made in the Scriptures of truth against every error which has prevailed in the world. The great source of division in the beginning of the Gospel, was the doctrine of the Judaizing teachers; and the same doctrine has continued to divide the people of God to the present day. As Peter would have retained Moses and Elias upon the mount with the Lord, men have attempted to retain the carnal ordinances of Judaism in the spiritual kingdom of Christ; and upon this principle, in imitation of Israel, men become Christians by birth, and Christendom is the general name of those countries whose inhabitants assume that title, which belongs only to those who are born of God, and are the temple of the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in them.

Christian nations, so called, are represented as the successors of Israel, only enjoying greater privileges in consequence of the superiority of the new dispensation; and therefore the language employed by the prophets is considered applicable to sinners of the Gentiles. The foundation of this error is, not understanding that Judaism was God’s covenant with a nation; Christianity, his covenant with men individually. The law of Moses was written for Israel upon tables of stone; that of Christ on the fleshy tables of the heart of every child of the covenant. Neither covenant can be broken. Whom Christ loves, be loves to the end; and although God has taken vengeance on the inventions of Israel, he will never leave nor forsake them. God hath not cast away his people whom he foreknew; they shall yet look upon Him whom they have pierced, and mourn. His covenant with them is as firm as that with day and night — “Considerest thou not what this people have spoken, saying, The two families which the Lord hath chosen, he hath even cast them off? thus they have despised my people, that they should be no more a nation before them. Thus saith the Lord, If my covenant be not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth; then will I cast away the seed of Jacob, and David my servant, so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: for I will cause their captivity to return, and have mercy on them,” Jer. xxxiii. 24—26. His indignation shall cease, and his anger in the destruction of their enemies, Isa. x. 25. “For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee. In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Redeemer. For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee,” Isa. liv. 7—10.

In applying to Gentiles the expressions God’s love to Israel, many forget of whom Israel was a type. They were not a type of mankind, but of the true Israel; and hence the Apostles apply to believers the promises and exhortations addressed to Israel, but they never apply them to those who knew not God, and whom, therefore, so far as appeared, God had never known.

The error of putting nominal Christians on the same footing with Israel, is one of the pillars of the doctrine of universal Atonement. Observing God’s protestations of love to his ancient people, most of whom were alienated in heart from God, and not considering that amidst all their individual wickedness, they were, as a nation, the beloved of the Lord; because the middle wall of partition is broken down, and there is neither Jew nor Greek in Christ Jesus, many think themselves entitled to repeat the same protestations of Divine love to all mankind. But this is altogether unwarranted. Such language was proper in addressing God’s redeemed people, “his holy nation,” but it is utterly unscriptural when applied to mankind in general, who are not redeemed, but are under the curse of the broken law.

A few examples will illustrate the subject of these remarks. It is fully admitted, that salvation through Christ is to be equally proclaimed to all, irrespective of character, or of any external relation; but it is denied, that in preaching the Gospel, the Gentiles are to be addressed in the language employed by the prophets in their preaching to Israel.

It has been stated, that the election of Israel was national, and that, in consequence, their national existence is secure. The Lord repeatedly declares he will make a full end of other nations, but not of them. Hence we find, amidst the fullest exposure of their wickedness, and the most pungent reproofs, the Lord addressing them in the kindest and most consoling manner. Of this we have an example in the first chapter of Isaiah. After referring to the judgements which they had incurred by their wickedness, and his disregard of all their religious services, the Lord declares, that Jerusalem should be called the city of righteousness, the faithful city, while the transgressors should be destroyed. Again, Isaiah vi. after foretelling the blindness of the people, their rejection of Christ, and their consequent desolation, the prophet foretells that as a tree, although it cast its leaves, possesses sap which will enable it to put forth new leaves, so the holy seed should be the substance of the nation, and insure its restoration. This is parallel to our Lord’s declaration, when, foretelling the destruction of Jerusalem, he says, that for the elect’s sakes, these days of vengeance should be shortened, otherwise the whole would have been cut off, Mat. xxiv. 22.

Reference has already been made to Ezek. xvi., where, after exposing the wickedness of Jerusalem, all is closed with the assurance of forgiveness. In Ezek. xxxvi., the Lord recounts the judgements which he had inflicted on Israel, but comforts them with the assurance of his love and favour. The prophecies of Hosea, which contain so many denunciations of the wickedness of Israel, and the consequent judgements to be inflicted upon them, conclude with the assurance, that God will heal their backslidings, and deliver them from all their idols. These examples, which might be enlarged to an unlimited extent, are sufficient to prove that the language addressed to God’s peculiar people, is not our model in addressing mankind in general.

The law and the prophets were until John, who was the harbinger of the new dispensation, and we find his language very different from that of the prophets. They were sent to the nation, and while they testified against its wickedness, mingled, as we have seen, their reproofs with the assurance of God’s love, and his thoughts of kindness, towards Israel. John addressed men as individuals, and told them that they should reap what they sowed, and should perish except they repented.

In our Lord’s parables, he described the nature of his kingdom, and declared that the kingdom of God, so long established in Israel, should be taken from them, and given to the righteous nation which keepeth the truth. At the conclusion of his ministry, he foretold the desolation of Jerusalem. This passage has been misunderstood. Christ has been represented as shedding tears over a lost world, —over sinners of mankind; which is not the case. Our Lord refers to the destruction of Jerusalem. We have already seen that the covenant at Sinai was national, and consequently, all its promises and threatenings were of a temporal nature, for nations exist only in time. The promises and threatenings, Lev. xxvi. and Deut. xxviii, are all temporal. God’s dealings with Israel were a pattern and shadow of heavenly things; and had one promise of eternal life for obedience, or one threatening of eternal punishment for disobedience, been introduced by Moses, it would have destroyed the symmetry of the whole, —it would have blended the type with the antitype, confounding the letter and the spirit.

Foreseeing what was to happen, the Lord wept over the city, not on account of the final state of its inhabitants, although no doubt this was present to his mind; he reviewed all his dealings with them, when, as the angel of the covenant, He delivered them from the house of bondage, —led them to Canaan, —chastened them as a father does his child —spread his wings to shelter them; but they had resisted all his kindness. They were now about to fill up the measure of their iniquities, and ere long their enemies would cast a trench about them, and lay their city even with the ground, Luke xix. 41—44.[*********] But still he would not forsake them; their restoration is plainly foretold. “Behold, your house is left onto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord,” Mat. xxiii. 38, 39.

When we advert to the preaching of the Apostles, we find them still reminding Israel of their national privileges: “Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities,” Acts iii. 26; but at the same time, they were taught that they must individually give account of themselves to God. To the Gentiles the Apostles declared the incarnation, miracles, death, and resurrection of the Lord, and the doctrine of remission of sins through his name. They preached salvation by faith in Jesus; they proclaimed that God commanded all men everywhere to repent. Nay, they besought men to be reconciled to God. Knowing the terrors of the Lord, they persuaded men; but they never spoke of God's love to the Gentiles while in unbelief, as the prophets had spoken to Israel.

Want of attention to this has been the means of strengthening in many the unscriptural idea of universal Atonement. Observing that upon the figurative redemption of Israel were founded those expressions of love and tenderness so frequent in the prophets, and taking it for granted that the Gentiles had now succeeded to the same privileges, they insist upon the universal love of God to mankind, —a doctrine which inevitably leads to universal salvation. If the restoration of Israel is undoubted because of that love with which God uniformly regarded them amidst all their backslidings, certainly the salvation of the whole of Adam's race would be the final result of God's universal love. How inconsistent with this is the fact that, during eighteen hundred years, so small a part of the world have heard the glad tidings of pardon through Christ!

CHAPTER XXII.

Passages of the Word of God Which Assert the Limitation of Redemption to the Sheep of Christ.

IN studying the Scriptures, we must make use of the reason which God has given us, and frequent appeals are made to our sense of propriety. “I speak,” says the Apostle, “as to wise men, judge ye what I say.” While we are commanded not to exercise ourselves in things too high for us, or to presume to cavil at any of the declarations of God, He addresses us as rational creatures, and appeals to our judgement and feelings in regard to His conduct towards His people, and their ungrateful returns.

In consequence of our natural alienation from God, we are prone to abuse this condescension, by endeavouring to explain what we do not understand, and to make it coincide with our preconceived notions. Against this we are cautioned by the declaration that God’s thoughts are not our thoughts, nor his ways our ways. We are reminded that his power is unlimited, and that while the perfection of his character affords ample security against this power being abused, we cannot by searching find out God. We are taught not to lean to our own understanding; we are informed that such is the transcendent wisdom displayed in the Gospel, that it hath made foolish the wisdom of this world, and therefore we must receive the truth with the meekness of a little child. These cautions are equally necessary for believers as for those who know not God. Had God never condescended to reason with us,—had he always spoken to us as a Sovereign, and required implicit submission to what he was pleased to reveal, without giving us any explanation of his mode of proceeding, those whose high imaginations are cast down, would have been more habitually still, and known that he is God; but as he frequently addresses his people as a father doth his children, lamenting their perverseness, and entreating them to listen to his admonitions, even believers are too frequently emboldened to attempt to modify the declarations of the word of God, for the purpose of removing the prejudices of infidels, as well as of concealing difficulties, to the solution of which our faculties are unequal.

Every religious controversy must be determined by the word of God, and the more simple our appeal to this unerring standard, the less are we in danger of falling into error. It is, however, to be regretted that even Christians are more disposed to establish their views of truth by reasoning, than by referring to those parts of the word of God which directly bear upon the subject. In discussions respecting the Atonement, there has been too much reasoning, and too little reference to the law and the testimony. Hence, by the help of metaphysical distinctions, such as the contemplation of God under the double character of a Sovereign and a moral Governor —distinguishing between a desire and purpose in the Divine mind to save sinners, between the Atonement and the purpose to save by means of the Atonement; and dividing justice, which is in its essence one and indivisible, into public, commutative, and distributive, much has been done to darken counsel by words without knowledge. God is ONE, and while He doeth what pleaseth him, justice and judgement are the habitation of his throne, while mercy and truth go before his face.

In the Gospel, his character is most fully developed, for there we behold his various attributes perfectly harmonized. He showed, by the destruction of the rebel angels, the consequences of disobedience; thus giving a solemn warning to all his intelligent creatures of the inseparable connexion of sin and suffering. In the salvation of a countless multitude of the human race, he has given a far more awful view of the malignity of sin, than if all mankind had perished, while he has made known the boundless riches of his wisdom and love, his mercy and justice, in grace reigning through righteousness unto eternal life.

The matter in dispute between the advocates of universal and limited Atonement, is not as to the number of the saved; both admit that the elect, and the elect alone, shall inherit eternal life; both admit that the Gospel is to be addressed to every creature, and that it is only by the almighty power of the Holy Spirit that the alienation of the human heart is so far overcome as to lead us to receive Christ, and salvation in him. The point in dispute is, whether the Atonement was made for all, or whether it was made only for the elect; whether it is effectual for all in whose behalf it was offered, or whether the far greater part of those for whom Christ died, not only perish in their sins, but never have an opportunity of hearing the Saviour’s name, or of receiving benefit through his incarnation, sufferings, and death. In either case, salvation is the effect of Divine sovereignty; both parties admit that God alone makes one to differ from another. Under this aspect, the new system is preferable to Arminianism, but it tends more to keep out of view the Spirit as the Author of faith. Arminians not only hold the universality of the Atonement, but maintain that the Spirit is given to every man,—which they consider necessary to our responsibility for the reception which we give to the Gospel, —and insist upon the importance of his operation; while the advocates of the new system, justly maintaining that the Spirit is given only to the elect, dwell too exclusively on man’s responsibility, —which is indeed exceedingly important; —and appear in a great measure to forget, although they do not deny, that the natural man receiveth. not the things of the Spirit of God, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.[†††††††††] They tell us this is not a natural, but a moral inability; yet it is not the less absolute, for, according to the doctrine of Scripture, the same power which raised Christ from the dead, has been put forth in delivering believers from the power of darkness, and translating them into the kingdom of God’s dear Son, Eph. i. 19, 20.

It is the object of the present chapter to produce a few passages in which the particularity of redemption is expressly taught.

We have already seen, that when God’s purpose of mercy to the human race was first announced, it was limited to one of the two families into which mankind were divided. We have also seen that for two thousand years, God’s regards were confined to one family, whom he describes as his redeemed people. Among them he maintained the knowledge of himself, while all the rest of the world were “without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world,” Eph. ii. 12. This nation was the type of the true Israel, —the elect of God, —the children of Abraham by faith, Gal. iii. 29. who obtain eternal redemption, Heb. ix. 12. The Lord says concerning the nation of Israel, “You only have I known of all the families of the earth;” which exactly agrees with the New Testament declarations, “The Lord knoweth them that are his,” while he will say to those who perish, “I NEVER knew you.” Did he lay down his life for those, all knowledge of whom at any period of their existence, he will thus expressly disclaim!

The same thing is taught in the Lord’s representation of himself as the good shepherd who knows his sheep, and for them lays down his life, John x. 14, 15. It is said, No doubt Christ laid down his life for his sheep; but it is not said only for them. Such a supplement was quite unnecessary; it is plainly implied, although not expressed. It is said, There is one God and one Mediator between God and man; but the word only is not added; now, upon the same principle that men argue in favour of universal Atonement, because it is said to have been made for the sheep, —and not for the sheep only, —it might be alleged that there was more than one Mediator. Again, our Lord says, There shall be one fold, and one shepherd, John x. 16; but because it is not said only one, it might be alleged that there was more than one. The weakness of this objection might be illustrated by many passages. It will hardly be maintained that Christ stands in the relation of a shepherd to any except his sheep. The shepherd and the sheep are relative terms, and the Lord is never represented as sustaining this relation except to his chosen people. We have his express declaration, that he laid down his life for his sheep whom he knows, while he represents himself as saying to all others, “I never knew you.” Let it be observed, that men are the sheep of Christ by election, not by faith: “Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice,” John x. 16. He represents them as having been given to him by his Father, and consequently they shall never perish, ver. 28; and assigns as the reason why the Jews whom he was addressing did not believe, that they were not of his sheep, ver. 26; whose characteristic it is that they hear his voice, and follow him, and are thus distinguished from the goats, the seed of the serpent, for whom he did not lay down his life, because he never knew them.

“Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed,” Isa. liii. 4, 5. We have here a plain description of the nature, extent, and efficacy of the Atonement. Christ did not bear in vain the griefs and sorrows of his people. Those for whose transgressions he was bruised—the chastisement of whose peace was laid upon him, —are healed with his stripes. Like sheep, they had all gone astray; had turned everyone to his own way; and the Lord laid upon him the iniquities of them all, ver. 6; they have in consequence returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of their souls, 1 Pet. ii. 25. Again it is written, “For the transgression of my people was he stricken,” Isa. liii. 8. In consequence of his soul being made an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hands. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and be satisfied, verses 10, 11. “By his knowledge[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.” Here the inseparable connexion between atonement and justification is expressly taught.

“As for thee also, by the blood of thy covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water,” Zech. ix. 11. The angels that sinned are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness to the judgement of the great day. Fallen man was involved in the same condemnation; and while it was impossible that sin should go unpunished, God said of a countless multitude, “Deliver from going down to the pit, I have found a ransom;” and this ransom was the blood of his only begotten Son, —Immanuel, —God manifest in the flesh! The everlasting covenant between the Father and the Son, by which the salvation of the redeemed was secured, is ratified with this most precious blood; and thus his prisoners were sent forth out of the pit wherein was no water, and where they must therefore have inevitably perished. Their deliverance is ascribed to the blood of their covenant, by which their sins had been blotted out. They who were afar off were made nigh by the blood of Christ; they were dead, and the communication of the Spirit of life from God was essentially necessary for them; but this, and every other blessing, were secured to them by the blood, or the ratification, of the covenant. They were Christ’s purchased possession; they were betrothed to him in truth and righteousness; the day of espousals was fixed, when, by becoming one spirit with him, the union was to be completed. When the great Shepherd of the sheep was brought from the dead through the blood of the everlasting covenant, an inviolable pledge was given, that through the same blood should all his sheep, —all the children of the covenant, —be brought to partake of the glory into which he had entered as their Head and Forerunner.

“In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness,” Zech. xiii. 1. For whom is the fountain opened? For the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to remove their guilt. The house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem are exclusively the people of God, —the children of the new covenant, Jer. xxxi. 31; Gal. iv. 26. It is true, that God has visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name; believers of every nation are now the children of Abraham, Gal. iii. 29. This explains the words of John the Baptist, “God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham,” and also the words of the Apostle, that the believing Gentiles are cut off from the wild olive-tree, and are graffed, contrary to nature, into the good olive tree, while the unbelieving Jews are broken off. This exactly corresponds with our Lord’s words: “And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth,” Matt. viii. 11, 12. To the same purpose it is said, that Christ is exalted a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. Every part of his work is for Israel, —the “holy nation,” — the “peculiar people,” 1 Pet. ii. 9; not for the world.

“Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones,” Zech. xiii. 7. This passage is quoted by our Lord, Matt. xxvi. 31; but the connexion between God smiting the shepherd and turning his hand upon the little ones, deserves particular attention, as a proof of the inseparable connexion between the death of the Shepherd and the sheep being received into the favour of God.

That the Atonement was not made for all, but for the elect, is evident from the words which Jesus employed in the institution of the Lord’s Supper: “This is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” Certainly the Lord’s Supper is an ordinance of the new covenant, and, consequently, intended exclusively for the children of that covenant; their sins only are remitted, as it is written, “I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more,” Jer. xxxi. 34. In the institution of the Supper, as recorded by Luke, the Lord says, “This is the new covenant in my blood which is shed for you; and Paul, in recording the institution, writes, “This is my body which is broken for you,” 1 Cor. xi. 24, which exactly agrees with the declaration, that “the good Shepherd laid down his life for the sheep.”

“Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood,” Acts xx. 28. Can words be more explicit? This is exactly parallel to Eph. v. 25, “Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish,” ver. 26, 27. Hence the Church is called Christ’s purchased possession, Eph. i. 14; and hence believers are said not to be their own, but bought with a price, 1 Cor. vi. 20, and are sealed by the Holy Spirit as his property, Eph. iv. 30; their members are the members of Christ, 1 Cor. vi. 15, and their body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in them. They were sometime alienated, but are reconciled by the death of Christ; they are a people near to God, and pardon, repentance, and every heavenly and spiritual blessing flow to them through the Atonement, Rom. viii. 32.

Intimately connected with this are the words of the Apostle, “Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot,” 1 Pet. i. 18, 19. Believers are here represented as having been redeemed from their vain conversation with the precious blood of Christ. Redemption, in Scripture, is not a name, but a reality, —it secures a specific object; the title given to Israel, “the redeemed of the Lord,” was founded, not on a nominal, but a substantial deliverance from bondage.

In the Lord’s intercessory prayer, John xvii. we have a conclusive proof of the peculiarity of the Atonement. Jesus has received “power over all flesh,” for an express purpose, “that he might give eternal life to as many as the Father hath given him,”[§§§§§§§§§] ver. 2. This eternal life consists in knowing the true God, and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent, ver. 3; and of this the Lord represents himself as having made those partakers who were given to him out of the world, by manifesting to them the Father’s name; and after referring to their faith in him, as having been sent of God, he adds, “I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine,” ver. 9. The sacrifice and the incense in Israel were inseparable; both exclusively belonged to the priestly office. When, therefore, Christ disclaimed praying for the world, he equally disclaimed dying for the world. The Atonement and intercession were necessarily co-extensive. It has been said, that when the Lord uttered these words, he was praying for his apostles; but what then? There are many promises made by the Lord to his Apostles, which, although originally addressed to them, are intended for all believers. Did he mean to disclaim praying for the seventy, and for the five hundred brethren who saw him after his resurrection? He had manifested the Father’s name to them, as well as to the Apostles. Had not these also been given him out of the world? Consequently, when he says, I pray “for them which thou hast given me, for they are thine,” he must have referred to all who had believed in him, —and, indeed, to all who had been given him in the everlasting council, —although there may, no doubt, be a special reference to the Apostles, who were the twelve foundations of the wall of the city of God. There is no objection to suppose that this part of the prayer particularly referred to the Apostles, considered as the representatives of the Church, like the twelve pillars erected by Moses, Exod. xxiv. 4, upon which the blood of the covenant was sprinkled, as representing the twelve tribes of Israel; but it is impossible, with any appearance of plausibility, to maintain that when Christ says, “I pray for them, I pray not for the world,” he intended to exclude from his intercession those to whom he had manifested his Father’s name, and every one of whom had been given to him, as well as the Apostles. When the Lord prayed his Father to keep, through his own name, those whom he had given him, ver. 11; whom he described as not of the world, ver. 14; for whom he prays that they may be kept from the evil, ver. 15; that they may be sanctified through the truth, ver. 17; can anyone suppose that he intended to exclude all his disciples, with the exception of the Apostles! In this case they are not referred to in any part of the prayer. The Lord did indeed pray for them who should hereafter believe, ver. 20; but, on this supposition, —in regard to those who had already believed, —his prayer is completely silent.

This sublime prayer of our blessed Lord, when parting from his disciples, ought to put an end to all controversy respecting the extent of the Atonement. Those for whom the Lord does not intercede, can have no more part with him than those whom he does not wash, John xiii. 8. It is true that the Lord prays that through the unity of his people the world may believe that he was sent of God, xvii. 21; but this creates no difficulty. It will afterwards appear that the term world is used in Scripture in very different senses, which is also the case in our ordinary conversation; and all must, on consideration, be satisfied, that by the connexion alone in which general terms are employed, can their import be ascertained. When the Lord disclaims praying for the world, contrasted with those whom the Father had given him, we can be at no loss to recognize the seed of the serpent, —the world that lieth in the wicked one; and when we afterwards read of the world believing in the mission of the Son of God, we are naturally led to the contemplation of the countless multitude, “of all nations, kindreds, and tongues,” Rev. vii. 9, who shall swell Immanuel’s triumph.

An attempt has been made to elude the force of this passage, by alleging that the Lord only disclaims praying for the world at that particular time, but that afterwards he prayed for it when he said upon the cross, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” On this I observe: 1st, The prayer was not offered for the world in general, but for the nation of Israel, which God will never forsake. 2nd, This prayer was answered in the thousands who believed on the day of Pentecost. Every child of Abraham who has been converted to God owes his conversion to this short but comprehensive prayer. By crucifying the Lord of glory, Israel filled up the measure of their iniquity; and had there not been a remnant, according to the election of grace, they had been as Sodom. But as the names of the tribes of Israel were engraved on the breastplate of the high priest, so were the names of his people on the heart of Jesus; and when he prayed, “Father, forgive them,” he had in view not only the myriads who believed in the beginning of the Gospel, but the elect of Israel who are yet unborn, for whose sake the days of vengeance were shortened. On the whole, considering the atonement and intercession as component and inseparable parts of the priest’s office, our Lord’s declaration that he prays not for the world, affords a DEMONSTRATION that the Atonement was made exclusively for the Church.

“And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth,” John xvii. 19. Here the Lord restricts the Atonement to his disciples. Christ sanctified himself, —set himself apart for his people, —that they might be sanctified, —set apart from an ungodly world, as vessels of honour, meet for the Master’s use. With this we may compare Heb. xiii. 11, 12, “For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp. Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.” This exactly corresponds with what is written of Christ making reconciliation for the sins of the people, Heb. ii. 17. By this term, Israel, God’s chosen people, are described. The Jews charged Paul with teaching all men everywhere against the people, and the law, and the temple, Acts xxi, 28. God threatens to provoke Israel to jealousy, by them that are no people, and to anger them by a foolish nation, Rom. x. 19. And to the same purpose the Apostle describes those whom he terms a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a peculiar people, as having been in time past not a people, but now the people of God; which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy, 1 Pet. ii. 9, 10. In correspondence with the appointment that the bodies of those beasts whose blood was brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, should be burnt without the camp, Jesus suffered without the gate, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood. As the nation of Israel had been sanctified, or set apart, as God’s peculiar people, by the blood of the Sinai covenant, so are the children of the new covenant, —the true Israel, —sanctified, or set apart, to God, by the blood of Jesus.

“Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification,” Rom. iv. 26. Few things have tended more to lead believers into erroneous views of the Gospel, than want of attention to the character of those to whom the epistles were addressed, and, consequently, applying to men in general what only belongs to believers. The addresses of the epistles plainly show for whom they are intended. To the beloved of God, —the saints, — the sanctified, the faithful in Christ Jesus, the holy brethren; and we are taught the same lesson by their contents, which are always descriptive of those who have passed from death to life.[**********] Now, Christ was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification. Nothing is more evident than that the justification of those for whose offences Christ was delivered, is here plainly declared. It could not be otherwise, unless the Atonement be altogether set aside, and the death of the Son of God represented, not as required by the essential justice and truth of God, but merely designed to produce an impression on his creatures. This is most dishonourable to the Divine government; it represents Him, before whom the nations are as a drop in the bucket, and the small dust of the balance, as governing the universe upon the principles of human governments, which, from their intrinsic weakness and imperfection, depend upon the opinion of their subjects. Whatever God does, either in a way of mercy or of judgement, he does for his own name’s sake, Ezek. xxxvi. 22, because it becomes him, Heb. ii. 10; his conduct is the manifestation of his glorious character. In the passage before us, it is plainly declared that those for whom Christ was delivered were justified by his resurrection—he was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification. Hence, believers are described as risen with him, Col. iii. 1.

“But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him,” Rom. v. 8, 9. No language can be more express. Christ died for the ungodly, —for those that were without strength. When they were sinners and enemies, such was the love of God that Christ died for them, and those for whom he died are justified by his blood, which removeth all their guilt. This is exactly parallel to Col. i. 14: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.” Here, having redemption through his blood is synonymous with the forgiveness of sins. We are said to be justified by grace —by Christ —by faith; and here believers are said to be justified by his blood—his sacrifice, which is at once the great object of faith, and the channel through which faith and every other spiritual blessing is imparted to the people of God. It has been already observed, that nothing but guilt prevents the love of God from flowing to his creatures. Christ cancelled the guilt of his people —redeemed them from the curse, and the never-failing consequence is, their inheriting a blessing; their guilt is expiated, and, being justified by his blood, much more shall they be saved from wrath through him; for all power in heaven and in earth is committed to him, that he may give eternal life to those whom he has ransomed with his blood. For them he is seated on his mediatorial throne, and in their successive generations he calls them by his grace, guides them by his counsel, and afterwards receives them to his glory.

“For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son; much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so; but we also joy in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the Atonement,” Rom. v. 10, 11. To reconcile is to atone for, and thus restore to favour. “And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby,” Eph. ii. 16. Socinians set aside the Atonement altogether, alleging that the Scriptures do not represent God as being reconciled to man, but man as being reconciled to God, by laying aside his enmity; but this is founded upon want of attention to the use of the word, both in Greek writers and in the Scriptures. The lords of the Philistines inquire wherewith David should reconcile himself to his master but with the heads of those men in whose ranks he professed to fight, 1 Sam. xxix. 4. Here reconcile evidently means restore himself to his master's favour. So in Mat. v. 24, — “first be reconciled to thy brother;” the person who brought his gift to the altar had given his brother some cause of offence, he must therefore give him satisfaction; and this is termed being reconciled to him. Again —a wife has forsaken her husband, and she is commanded to be reconciled to him. She is the aggressor, and by returning is to make satisfaction, 1 Cor. vii. 11. In the same manner, we are said to be reconciled to God by the death of his Son; to be restored to the favour of the righteous Lord who loveth righteousness. Through the atoning blood of Jesus, God is pacified towards his people for all that they have done, Ezek. xvi. 63. He who “is our peace,’’ Eph. ii. 14, hath “made peace through the blood of his cross,” Col. i. 20. Having found a ransom, God says of those for whom it was made, “Deliver from going down to the pit,” Job xxxiii. 24. Although God was angry with us, his anger is turned away from us, and being thus restored to his favour, much more shall we be saved through the life of our glorious Advocate. The efficacy of the sacrifice, demonstrated by his resurrection, secures the success of the intercession. And not only so, but even in this vale of tears we joy in God through Jesus Christ, by whom we have received the reconciliation or Atonement.

The meaning of reconciliation is farther evident, by what is said of reconciling the holy places, which does not mean producing a change upon inanimate matter; but purifying them, —removing the uncleanness inherent in every work of sinful man —purging them with blood, and thus rendering them a suitable abode for the Holy One of Israel. The Apostle tells us, it was necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with such sacrifices; but the heavenly things themselves required better sacrifices than these, Heb. ix. 23. Accordingly, he has entered by his own blood into heaven itself, having obtained eternal redemption for his people.

“For sin shall not have dominion over you; for ye are not under the law, but under grace,” Rom. vi. 14. All mankind are by nature under the law, and consequently under the curse, Gal. iii. 10; but here the Apostle declares, that believers are not under the law but under grace. “Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God,” Rom. vii. 4. He repeats the same thing, Gal. ii. 19, 20. “For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” He was crucified in and with Christ —he died in Christ’s death; in him he endured the curse of the law. To the same purpose he says, 2 Cor. v. 14, “If one died for all, all died.” The death of the Substitute was the death of all in whose place he stood, —of all the children of the covenant of which he is Surety, Heb. vii. 22. The same thing is taught by another Apostle. “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 are healed,” 1 Pet. ii. 24. Those whose sins Christ bore in his own body on the tree are dead to sins, and live unto righteousness.

“Christ hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit,” 1 Pet. iii. 18; or, as it is elsewhere termed, “justified in the Spirit,” 2 Tim. iii. 16; and his justification was the justification of all whom he is not ashamed to call brethren, who are represented as having risen with Christ, and are described as dead, and their life hid with Christ in God. Hence believers are commanded to reckon themselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive to God through Jesus Christ; because Christ died (a victim) unto sin, and liveth unto God, Rom. vi. 10,11. He only that is dead is freed (justified) from sin, Rom. vi. 7. In Christ, the head of his body the Church, the law has had its course, —ample satisfaction has been given it —its full penalty has been endured, and God has testified his acceptance of Christ's offering, by raising him from the dead, not as a private individual, but as the Head of his body the Church, all the members of which, in virtue of their unity with him, are represented as being raised up together, and made to sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, Eph. ii. 6.

“He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things,” Rom. viii. 32. According to this declaration, if God delivered up his Son for all mankind, He will with him freely give them all things; but he does not give to all faith, repentance, and other spiritual blessings; nay, to the far greater part of mankind, God has not given the means by which faith is produced. Faith cometh by hearing the word of God, with which mankind in general are not favoured. The conclusion is inevitable: He did not deliver his Son for all mankind, but for the elect, and with him He freely gives them all things.

“Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth, who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us,” Rom. viii. 33, 34. The elect were all justified in the resurrection of Christ, their covenant Head, and for them there is no condemnation; their salvation is secured by his intercession, founded on the perfection of his Atonement.

“For Christ is the end of the law, for righteousness to everyone that believeth,” Rom. x. 4. The law was not given in vain; not one tittle of it shall pass without being fulfilled. It is true, that by the deeds of the law no flesh shall be justified in God’s sight: every mouth is stopped, and all the world become guilty before God; but Christ, as the Head, and Surely, and Substitute of his people, hath magnified and made it honourable. It was within his heart, and he has yielded to it all the obedience it required. In virtue of his unity with the children whom, as the second Adam, God had given him, and with whom he took part in flesh and blood, he who knew no sin, was made sin; and they are made the righteousness of God in him, 2 Cor. v. 21. According to the prophecies that went before, they are all righteous, Isa. lx. 21. As the children of Adam, they were guilty and polluted; but in Christ, they are unreprovable. They are in due time born again, created anew in Christ; and although they must have fellowship with him in descending to the dust, it is that they may also have fellowship with him in his resurrection to an endless life.

Dr Wardlaw, indeed, maintains, that when the Apostle says, “He hath made him who knew no sin, to be sin for us, he cannot mean, with any exclusiveness, for us believers, or for us the elect; inasmuch as what motive or inducement could it be to the unreconciled to accept the reconciliation or the offered friendship of their God,[††††††††††] to tell them that an Atonement had been made, and a justifying righteousness provided for others?[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] p. 130. Had the Apostle intended that Christ was made sin for all mankind, —that the Atonement was universal, the natural way of urging the message of reconciliation would have been, “Be ye reconciled to God, for he hath made him to be sin for you;” but, having stated the universality of the Gospel invitation, he limits the Atonement to believers: “Be ye reconciled to God, for he hath made him to be sin for us.” All who come under the sound of the Gospel are besought to be reconciled to God, by the consideration, that he who believeth shall be saved, —that Christ will cast out none who come to him, however aggravated their guilt. For whom the Atonement was actually made, is a secret thing which belongs to God; but to us it is revealed, that, in calling on the name of the Lord, the vilest shall be saved. “God hath made him to be sin for us” (who believe;) we are made the righteousness of God in him. The two clauses are co-extensive; those for whom Christ was made sin are made the righteousness of God in him. If we understand us for whom he was made sin, to include all, it necessarily follows that we who are made the righteousness of God in him, must likewise include all mankind.

“Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father,” Gal. i. 4. The object of the death of Christ, as here stated, was to deliver his people from this present evil world, and this he accomplishes, by delivering them from the curse of the broken law. The question is, whether the greater part of those for whom Christ gave himself, remain the servants of the god of this world, or whether they are all brought into the glorious liberty of God’s children. In other words, whether the greater part of those for whose sins Christ made Atonement, receive no benefit, but either have their condemnation awfully aggravated, 2 Cor. ii. 16, —which is the case with those who reject the Gospel; or never hear of the possibility of escaping the wrath to come, —which is the case with so great a proportion of mankind. The inconsistency of this is increased by the admission of the doctrine of election, for it must be granted, that the elect alone receive benefit by the Atonement.

“Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith,” Gal. iii. 13, 14. Nothing can be more evident than that those for whom Christ was made a curse, are redeemed from the curse of the law. If then he were made a curse for all mankind, all must inherit a blessing, for the removal of the curse and the enjoyment of the blessing are inseparable. Till man came under the curse, he walked with God; but he sold himself to Satan, and became the servant of sin. Through the Atonement, the prey is taken from the mighty and the lawful captive delivered, and, by the Gospel, Christ enters the heart, and dwells in his ransomed brethren; thus he sees of the travail of his soul.

This exactly corresponds with God’s declaration, “For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater; so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth; it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it,” Is. lv. 10, 11. Hence the Apostle informs us he endured all things for the elect’s sake. He was unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: To the one, he was the savour of death unto death, to the other the savour of life unto life, 2 Cor. ii. 16.

“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it. That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy, and without blemish,” Eph. v. 25—27. As the good shepherd laid down his life for the sheep, so Christ is here said to have loved the Church, and given himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it, &c. For two thousand years, this Church was prefigured by the family of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who alone were redeemed, to whom alone God showed his word, his statutes, and judgements, Psal. cxlvii. 19; and of whom he says, “You only have I known of all the families of the earth,” Amos iii. 2.

“When he had by himself purged our sins,” Heb. i. 3. Whose sins has Christ purged or expiated? Surely only the sins of his people. The great Head and Elder Brother of the seed of the woman, nailed to his cross the law which condemned them. Thus did he, as the first-born, trample upon Satan; and by the Gospel, he gives them the “white stone,” the pledge of their justification and acceptance through his blood.

“Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood, he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us,” Heb. ix. 12. For whom was the redemption obtained? For us, —for the true Israel. This redemption was prefigured by the deliverance from Egypt, which was peculiar to Israel after the flesh. It was a temporal redemption, a shadow for the time then present. The temporal redemption was obtained through the sprinkling of the blood of the paschal lamb. The Apostle says, “Christ, our passover, is sacrificed for us; therefore let us keep the feast,” &c. The Egyptians had no fellowship with the people of God in the passover. The blood was exclusively sprinkled on behalf of Israel, and they alone kept the feast; so the blood of the Lamb of God was exclusively shed for the heirs of promise, and thus was their deliverance effected, and food prepared for them, by eating of which they might live.

“Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ, once for all,” Heb. x. 9, 10. What was the will of God which Christ came to do. “This is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day,” John vi. 39. And the Apostle tells us, that by this will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ, once for all. Many sacrifices which only “sanctified to the purifying of the flesh,” Heb. ix. 13, were offered in Israel; but the one offering of the Lord Jesus hath forever perfected them that are sanctified, Heb. x. 14. We read of the sanctification of the Spirit, but the communication of the Spirit is the fruit of believers being sanctified by the blood of the new covenant. Israel of old was sanctified as God’s peculiar people, by the blood of the Sinai covenant, and in connexion with this, his Spirit remained among them, Haggai ii. 5. This has its accomplishment in the true Israel, who being washed in the blood of Jesus, their guilt removed, their sins purged, are baptized by one spirit into one body.

“Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God,” 1 Pet. i. 20, 21. Christ was set up from everlasting, or ever the earth was; and for whom was he manifested? “For you who by him do believe in God.” He will say to all others, I never knew you.

These are but a few of those passages which limit the Atonement to the elect of God, —which prove that it is coextensive with salvation. How should it be otherwise? An atonement, or expiation, if sufficient, must remove the guilt of those for whom it was made. Had the family given to the second Adam been as numerous as the family of the first, the sacrifice on Calvary would have cancelled all their guilt. But such was not the will of God; and the Son, in ransoming a countless multitude of all nations, fulfilled his Father’s will. He took part in flesh and blood, not with the seed of Adam, but of Abraham, and none of his brethren shall be lost!

CHAPTER XXIII.

General Expressions Upon Which the Doctrine of Unlimited Atonement is Founded.

THAT the terms all, the world, the whole world, every man, are used in Scripture in reference to the Atonement, is certain, and this forms the most plausible objection to the great and fundamental truth, that Christ purchased the Church with his own blood. But it admits of an easy solution. The Jewish dispensation was confined to one nation, while all others were left in darkness and ignorance; having lost the knowledge of God, He gave them up to their own heart's lust, and they walked in their own counsels. The Mosaic dispensation was temporary, and introductory to the Gospel being preached to all nations. This preparatory dispensation answered the most important purposes.

1st, It prevented the knowledge of God from being entirely lost. His worship was established in a country situated in the centre of the world, —in the neighbourhood of those nations most celebrated for their power, knowledge, and advancement in civilization. Thus, in addition to the dispensations of His providence, (Acts xiv. 17,) God left not himself without a witness, (Isa. xliii. 12,) while he maintained in one nation the expectation of the coming of the Saviour.

2nd, In his dealings with Israel, God gave a striking proof of his faithfulness in the performance of his promises, which was peculiarly important, as he intended that his people, in every age, should live by faith. Two thousand years before the Saviour’s birth, the family from which he was to spring was designated. That family might have mingled with the nations, and still the promise, that Christ should spring from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, might have been fulfilled; but how could his lineage have been certainly traced after such a lapse of years? The separation of the family, so highly distinguished, was therefore necessary, to manifest the faithfulness of God.

3rd, A body of the most unquestionable evidence of the truth as it is in Jesus, was thus prepared. The kingdom which God established in Israel, was a carnal model of the spiritual kingdom, of which the true Israel are the subjects. Their redemption from Egyptian bondage was a shadow of the eternal redemption of the true Israel; their journey through the wilderness, —during which they did not eat bread in the sweat of their face, like other men, but were fed with manna, —was an emblem of the Christian life; the land which they inhabited was a type of the heavenly country; the covenant, by which they became the people of God, was the shadow of the new and better covenant. All the peculiar privileges which they enjoyed, resulted from their carnal relation to Christ, Rom. ix. 5, and were an emblem of the heavenly blessings enjoyed by the spiritual seed of Abraham, Gal. iii. 29. All their ordinances of worship, their temple, their priesthood, and their sacrifices, were a figure for the time then present, shadowing forth the one offering of the Son of God, and those spiritual sacrifices which the true Israel were to offer through their great High Priest, Heb. xiii. 15.

4th, By the separation of Israel from the nations, God provided a depository for the lively oracles; and it merits attention, that until this was provided, there was no written revelation. Indeed, the length of man's life before the flood, rendered this comparatively unnecessary.

God made choice of Moses to be the deliverer of Israel, and the type of the great Mediator between Himself and the children of the new covenant, as well as to be the first writer of the Holy Scriptures. He recorded the creation, the fall, the flood, and the call of Abraham, to whom God had made known the bondage of his children in Egypt, and their deliverance.

When the appointed period had elapsed, Moses led Israel forth, and gave them that code of laws by which they were to be governed, till He whose day Abraham had seen afar off, should appear and establish his kingdom. From the days of Moses, a succession of prophets was raised up in Israel, who not only reproved and warned the people, but foretold the coming of the Saviour, all the particulars of his birth, his character, miracles, death, and resurrection, his rejection by his kinsmen, and their consequent dispersion; together with the calling of the Gentiles, and the restoration of Israel. For two thousand years, Israel had been God’s witnesses in the observance of his worship, while the Gentiles were plunged in idolatry; and so far from their rejection of Christ preventing the continuance of their testimony, it has served to render it more remarkable and conclusive.

Had the Jews received Christ, the New as well as the Old Testament Scriptures would have been committed to them; and infidels might, with some plausibility, have alleged that there was collusion—that it was a scheme craftily devised for the aggrandisement of the nation; but this plea is cut off. They vouch for the truth of the prophecies which went before, and which have been read in their synagogues every Sabbath-day for eighteen hundred years, while they blaspheme the holy name of Him to whom they all relate, and in whom they all have their exact accomplishment. Thus, while they confirm the truth of the predictions, they refuse to admit their palpable fulfilment. The present state of the Jews is a constant miracle. Nothing can account for the circumstances in which they are placed, but their past history; and their preservation in a state so entirely different from that of any other nation, —and so impossible to subsist according to all natural principles, —shows the immediate interference of Divine power, as evidently as if we saw one raised from the dead. The reason why it makes so little impression, is, because it has continued so long, although this renders it more wonderful.[§§§§§§§§§§]

During our Lord’s personal ministry, when he sent out the Twelve and the Seventy to preach, he instructed them not to go in the way of the Gentiles, nor to enter into any city of the Samaritans, but rather to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. But after his resurrection, when the new covenant, for which the old only formed a preparation, was confirmed and ratified with his blood, the Apostles were commanded to go into all the world, and to preach the Gospel to every creature, that all the seed of Abraham might be gathered in, not that only which is of the law, but that which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, Rom. iv. 16. They were, however, to begin at Jerusalem; but those who were first bidden to the marriage were not worthy, and the servants were sent to the streets and lanes of the city, to the highways and hedges, that the house might be filled. The greater part of the Jewish nation rejected the counsel of God against themselves; and God made known his power, by raising up children to Abraham from all nations, according to the promise, — “In thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.”

No man was now to be known after the flesh. The middle wall of partition was broken down; and henceforth Jew and Gentile were put upon the same footing. The inward circumcision alone was to be of any avail. None were to be subjects of the new and spiritual kingdom but those who were born of God, —begotten with the word of truth, —born of the incorruptible seed of the word, which liveth and abideth forever.

Such is the foundation of the general terms made use of in the New Testament. Formerly, God had shown his word unto Jacob, his statutes and judgements unto Israel; but now ALL indiscriminately, without reference to families or nations, were to partake of the privileges of the Gospel; for Christ did not die for that nation only, but that he might gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.

The admission of the Gentiles into the Church of God is always spoken of as a mystery; it consists in God of the “stones raising up children to Abraham,” or in the Gentiles being grafted, contrary to nature, into the good olive-tree, by becoming the children of Abraham, and consequently the brethren of Christ. Thus was the prediction fulfilled, that the kingdom of God should be taken from Israel, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof, referring to the righteous nation which keepeth the truth, Isa. xxvi. 2. They all know the Lord, from the least to the greatest of them, Jer. xxxi. 34, and they are gathered from among all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues.

The greatest stumbling-block to the Jews, in the preaching of the Apostles, was that the Gentiles were elevated to the same level with themselves. When Paul addressed his countrymen from the stairs of the temple, they listened with deep interest to the account he gave of the crucified Jesus having appeared to him in glory and majesty on his way to Damascus, —of the change which the glorious vision had produced on his mind, —of his subsequent baptism, —and of the Lord having again appeared to him in the temple; but no sooner did he mention his mission to the Gentiles, than a burst of indignant clamour interrupted the marvellous narrative, and he would have been torn in pieces, had not the chief captain borne him away to the castle.

The prejudice against Gentiles being put upon the same footing with Israel, was not confined to unbelievers. Many Jews who had embraced the faith of Jesus, were still zealous of the law; and while they admitted that salvation was sent to the Gentiles, they insisted that those who believed should become Jews, by circumcision and the observance of the law. Hence one great object of the epistles to the churches was to counteract the doctrine of the Judaizers, “that the truth of the Gospel” —the Gospel in its purity — “might remain” among them. In such circumstances, it is evident that the Apostles would naturally be anxious to keep before the minds of the disciples the universality of the new dispensation, by the use of general terms, such as we find in the New Testament; to show that there was now no respect of persons,—that the distinction between Jew and Greek,—circumcision and uncircumcision, —was at an end, and that all who heard the Gospel, to whatever nation they belonged, were equally invited into the fellowship of which the Son of* God was the glorious Head.

Language, like everything human, is imperfect; it is frequently figurative, and it is only from use that we are able to assign the proper meaning to the terms employed. No term, however general, if considered out of its connexion, can with certainty convey to us the true meaning. The most general terms — “the world,” “all the world” “the whole world”—are frequently made use of in a limited sense.

The world sometimes signifies the material world, at other times the inhabitants of the world, and in many instances only a small part of mankind. Our Lord’s unbelieving kinsmen said, “Show thyself to the world,” John vii. 4, meaning, that he should go into Judea, that his disciples might see the works which he did, ver. 3. “Behold the world is gone after him,” John xii. 19, referring to a number of the people of Judea. The world sometimes denotes the ungodly, in contrast with the people of God. “I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me,” John xvii. 9. “The world knew him not,” John i. 10.

The Lord says, the Spirit will reprove the world of sin, of righteousness, and judgement; he is the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world; God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their trespasses to them. In these passages, the world denotes both Jews and Gentiles who are reconciled to God, —whose trespasses are not imputed, —whose sins are taken away, —who are saved.

The world sometimes means the Gentiles, as contrasted with the Jews. “Now, if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?” Rom. xi. 12. Again — “If the casting away of them (the Jews) be the reconciling of the world” (the Gentiles), ver. 15.

With the same latitude “all the world” is employed. A decree went forth that “all the world” should be taxed, meaning the Roman empire, which included but a very small part of Asia and Africa, and only a part of Europe; the Apostle speaks of the Gospel having come unto the Colossians “as in all the world,” (both to Jews and Gentiles.) All the world wondered after the beast, but the kingdom of the beast extended only to a small part of the world.

“The whole world” is used to denote the Gentiles. “He is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world, 1 John ii. 2, —men of every nation without distinction, Rev. v. 9. “The whole world lieth in wickedness,” 1 John v. 19. In the first clause of the verse, the Apostle says, “We know that we are of God,” so that the whole world cannot be understood universally.

The term all must also be frequently understood in a limited sense. In regard to this word, it has been well observed, that “the difference between all without exception, and all without distinction, is deserving of particular attention in this controversy. That Christ made Atonement for all without distinction, is freely conceded; that he made Atonement for all without exception, cannot be maintained, as we have seen, without involving ourselves in the most palpable contradiction; nor is there anything in the language of Scripture which requires us to adopt such a supposition.”[***********]

The term ail is frequently employed in regard to those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ; but this admits of an easy solution, in perfect conformity with the fundamental truth, that the good Shepherd laid down his life for the sheep, —that he purchased the Church with his own blood. Indeed the doctrine of universal salvation may be maintained from the use of this general term, much more plausibly than the doctrine of universal redemption. We have already referred to Rom. v. 18, 19, where the free gift is said to come upon all men, to justification of life. Again, the many are made sinners, and the many are made righteous. Again, “For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all,” Rom. xi. 32. All, here refers to Jews and Gentiles without distinction, but not without exception, else all would obtain mercy.

“Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all,” Gal. iv. 1. Here the heir is said to be “lord of all,” which is necessarily limited to his heritage.

“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive,” 1 Cor. xv. 22. There shall be a resurrection, both of the just and of the unjust; but neither in this chapter, nor in 1 Thess. iv., is anything said of the resurrection of the wicked, nor are the wicked ever said to be made alive. They are dead while they live, “vessels of wrath fitted for destruction.” In the verse quoted, the first all includes all the children of Adam, who in him incurred the wages of sin, the curse of the law; the second all is limited by the Apostle to those “that are Christ’s,” verse 23.

Our Lord says, “I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto me,” John xii. 32. But Christ’s flock, in every age, has been a little flock, and at this moment a very small part of the world has heard of his name.

“For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead,” 2 Cor. v. 14. Our translators have rendered the same verb in the same tense, differently in the two clauses of the verse, which is evidently improper. The passage teaches us that all Christ’s people died in him; the death of the head was the death of all the members.

“Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth,” 1 Tim. ii. 4. This cannot refer to men without exception, for since the publication of the Gospel, a very small part of mankind have enjoyed the means of coming to the knowledge of the truth. The Apostle had been speaking of kings and all in authority. Although a rich man shall hardly enter the kingdom of God, we are not to suppose the case of kings and rulers to be hopeless; we are to pray for all men, that such as enjoy the means of grace, may profit by them, and that they may be bestowed upon those who do not at present possess them.

“Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,” 1 Tim. ii. 6, —for all without distinction. The supposition that Christ gave himself a ransom for all mankind without exception, while so few ever heard of the ransom, is absurd. Men can only be saved by faith; and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? The grace of God is said to appear to all men, Tit. ii. 11; which must be understood of both Jews and Gentiles, for in no other sense has it appeared to all.

“O Thou that hearest prayer, unto Thee shall all flesh come,” Ps. lxv. 2. This must mean all without distinction, for all mankind never have, nor will come. While the world endures, it will be inhabited by the two families into which mankind were divided after the fall. “All flesh shall see the salvation of God,” Luke iii. 6. Such was the language of John the Baptist, foretold by the prophet, Isa. xl. 5., with reference to the breaking down the middle wall of partition, so that God would be equally the God of the Gentiles as of the Jews, Isa. xlix. 22, liv. 5.” I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh,” Acts ii. 17; compare Joel ii. 28. God had covenanted with Israel, that his Spirit should remain among them, Hag. ii. 5. This privilege was no longer to be confined to Israel, but should be extended to the Gentiles, or to all flesh. “That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great,” Rev. xix. 18. Here the flesh of all men is evidently men of all ranks, free and bond, small and great.

“For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe,” 1 Tim. iv. 10. “Saviour,” here, evidently means Preserver. “O Lord,” says the Psalmist, “thou preservest man and beast,” Psal. xxxvi. 6. God in his providence sustains all men, but his people are his especial care. How beautifully is this illustrated by his peculiar kindness to Israel!

Many other passages in which the word all is not to be understood of all without exception, might be quoted; for instance, “And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia, heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks,” Acts xix. 10. In the first place, “Asia” does not here mean the continent of Asia, but Asia Minor; and no one can suppose that all the inhabitants of the Roman province, without exception, heard Paul preach in the school of Tyrannus; but he preached publicly, and had many hearers. God is said to command all men everywhere to repent; but while no distinction is made in the command, there are many exceptions in the execution, so that the far greater part never hear the injunction.

Another general expression is, every one, or every man. But, as has already been observed, neither this, nor any other general expression, can prove that the proposition is universal; we must view it in its connexion.

A passage frequently and triumphantly adduced in favour of universal redemption is Heb. ii. 9, where Christ is said to taste death for “every man;” but the context proves that the general expression must be limited to the many sons to be brought unto glory, to whom Christ stands in the relation of the Captain of their salvation; the children whom God hath given him, with whom he took part in flesh and blood, and whom he is not ashamed to call brethren, being, in virtue of their relation to him, the seed of Abraham, Heb. ii. 10—16. In the passage before us, the expression every man, is peculiarly proper in reference to the subject treated of. It imports that the Captain of our salvation died for each of his people. He died for them, (as Israel is to be gathered) one by one, Isa. xxvii. 12.

We read of one to whom the Lord gave sight, that he “saw every man clearly.” Every man is said to press into the kingdom of God, Luke xvi. 16. The true light lighteth every man that cometh into the world, John i. 9; but the number of the enlightened is small. The first disciples sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men as everyone had need, Acts ii. 45. Gods deals to every man the measure of faith, Rom. xii. 3; every man shall have praise of God, 1 Cor. iv. 5; the head of every man is Christ, 1 Cor. xi. 3; these passages refer exclusively to the children of the new covenant. “The manifestation of the Spirit,” that is, the Spirit in his miraculous gifts, which few even of the disciples possessed, “is given to every man to profit withal.” Upon this passage, —precisely upon the same principle as the universality of the Atonement is maintained from Heb. ii. 9, —has been founded the unscriptural doctrine, that in consequence of Christ having died for all mankind, all receive a portion of the Holy Spirit, which, if improved, issues in salvation. This is thought necessary, to render men responsible for not receiving the love of the truth. Many other passages might be quoted, to prove that the expression every man, and other general terms, do not even afford a presumption in favour of the universality of the Atonement.

The necessity of the limitation of general expressions is evident, from the application of the word Gentiles. God is said to have given to the Gentiles repentance unto life, Acts xi. 18. On the Gentiles was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost, Acts x. 45; declaring the conversion of the Gentiles, Acts xv. 3. The Gospel is sent to the Gentiles, and they will hear it, Acts xxviii. 28. God is the God of the Gentiles, Rom. iii. 29. All this general language is elsewhere explained by God having visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name, Acts xv. 14, and his justifying the uncircumcision through faith. The advocates of universal Atonement, referring to John iii. 16, say, We keep by the plain declaration, God so loved the world. Let them apply the same principle to the passages in which the gift of the Holy Ghost is poured on the Gentiles, or in which we read of the conversion of the Gentiles.

Another class of objections to the doctrine of Scripture in regard to the Atonement, is founded on the warnings against destroying him for whom Christ died, Rom. xiv. 15; 1 Cor. viii. 11. These passages do not imply that those for whom Christ died, shall be destroyed or perish; but we are warned against conduct which has this tendency. The unbeliever makes God a liar, 1 John v. 10; not that the truth of God is in the smallest degree affected by the folly of a worm of the dust, but because he contradicts God, —treating the Divine testimony as a falsehood. The Israelites are warned against cutting off the families of the Kohathites from among the Levites, Numb. iv. 18. The continuance of the Kohathites was essential to the continuance of the dispensation. They alone were permitted to carry the holy vessels, and therefore they could not be cut off; but their brethren are warned against doing what had a tendency to their being cut off.

Much importance is attached by the advocates of universal Atonement, to 2 Pet. ii. 1, “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. ”Here, it is said, are people who deny the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. Their being bought or redeemed did not prevent their destruction.

Peter was the apostle of the circumcision, Gal. ii. 7; and both his epistles were addressed to the strangers of the dispersion; compare 1 Pet. i. 1, with 2 Pet. iii. 1. The false teachers who troubled the churches were in general Jews, Titus i. 10. Paul describes them as dogs,[†††††††††††] evil workers, the concision, enemies of the cross of Christ, Phil. iii. 2, 18, 19; they subverted “whole houses,” they were “vain talkers and deceivers,” “teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake.” They were more inexcusable, because they belonged to God’s chosen and redeemed people. Moses, in foretelling the wickedness of Israel had said, “Do ye thus requite the Lord, O foolish people, and unwise? Is not he thy Father that hath BOUGHT thee?” Deut. xxxii. 6. And to this the Apostle refers. The Apostle Jude describes the same persons as “denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ,” Jude 4. Their envy of the Gentiles led them to reject the Lord Jesus: and, in rejecting him, they rejected the Father, for He is known only in the Son. They contradicted and blasphemed the truth, Acts xiii. 45. They were willing to look upon God when his glory was veiled under types and figures; they minded “earthly things; and were therefore pleased with the carnal ordinances imposed on Israel till the time of reformation,” Heb. ix. 10. But when the shadows fled away, and the true character of God was exhibited in the unveiled face of Jesus, the natural alienation of their heart broke out, they denied him, and showed that they did not know him, although they said he was their God, John viii. 54, 55.

“The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is long-suffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance,” 2 Pet. iii. 9. This has been appealed to as a proof of God’s unwillingness that any should perish, and his desire that all should come to repentance. Here, as in the interpretation of other passages, many are misled by not attending to the distinction constantly observed in the Scriptures between the people of God and unbelievers, Jer. xv. 19. From the call of Abraham, his posterity in the line of Isaac and Jacob are represented as exclusively the people of God, which he had “purchased” and “redeemed,” Exod. xv. 16; Ps. lxxiv. 2; Hos. vii. 13; and in the new Testament, the true Israel are described as a chosen “generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar (or purchased) people,” 1 Pet. ii. 9; and those who apply to such as know not God, the promises and declarations of love so frequently made to the friends of Jesus, fall into precisely the same error as if they were to apply the affectionate expostulations and promises addressed to Israel, to the Moabites, Ammonites, &c. There is as real a separation between the people of God and the men of the world, in the New Testament, as between Israel and the heathen, in the Old. We have already observed, that although the Gospel is to be addressed to all men indiscriminately, the Gentiles have not come into the place of the Jews. This privilege belongs only to the true circumcision, to whom all the epistles are addressed.

In the passage before us, the Apostle had been treating of the scoffing and unbelief of the ungodly, and proceeds to warn his brethren against falling into the error of supposing that the Lord was slack in the fulfilment of the promise of his coming. They must not judge of his promise by the lapse of ages, but remember that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, Psal. xc. 4, and a thousand years as one day. He inhabiteth eternity, and his proceedings must not be judged by our narrow limits. The delay is owing to his “long-suffering to us-ward,” and his unwillingness that any of (us,) the brethren of Christ, —the seed of the woman, should perish, but that all (of us,) the whole family, Eph. iii. 15, should come to repentance. The world is continued for the sake of the elect. Our Lord, speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem, says, “Except that the Lord had shortened those days no flesh should be saved: but for the elect’s sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days, Mark xiii. 20. The whole Jewish nation would have been destroyed, had not the days of vengeance been shortened; but this was prevented for the elect’s sake who were yet to be born; and for the same reason the Lord delays his coming. All Christ’s sheep, —all whom the Father hath given him, —must be gathered in before the end come. It is not the Father’s will that any of them should perish. In the everlasting council they were given to their great Head and Surety, and they shall all be presented faultless before the presence of his glory. Thousands and ten thousands of the children of men perish; and this was intimated from the beginning, by their being described as the seed of the serpent. But God is not willing that any of the seed of the woman should perish; and his counsel shall stand, He will do all his pleasure, and will therefore delay his second coming till He has gathered in all his people.

The passage under consideration is parallel to Ezek. xxxiii. 11, “Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?” The expostulation is effectual— “all Israel shall be saved,” Rom. xi. 26; for Christ is exalted a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and the remission of sins, Acts v. 31. We have formerly observed that many are led into error by applying to all mankind what is addressed exclusively to Israel. The Apostle refers to the true Israel, toward whom God is long-suffering, not willing that any of them should perish, but that all of them should come to repentance; and it must be so. They were given to Christ, and he “must bring” them in to his fold, John x. 16. But multitudes of the human race do not enjoy the means of salvation, nor do they ever hear of the only name given under heaven among men, whereby they may be saved. They sin without law, and they perish without law. The privileges of those who come under the sound of the Gospel are very great, but the condemnation of many is aggravated by these privileges. The Apostle's language in this passage is similar to what is written, Rom. xiv. 7, 8. “For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live, therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s.” The expression, “no man dieth to himself,” means, no man of us; for it is not true that no ungodly man liveth to himself. The ungodly neither live nor die to the Lord, nor are they the Lord’s. He knoweth them not. Their god is their belly. But his people are his property, —his purchased possession, —and neither live nor die to themselves.

CHAPTER XXIV.

The Effects of the Doctrine of Universal Atonement Illustrated by the Sentiments Which Appear to be Becoming Prevalent in Scotland.

SOME time ago, a discussion arose among the members of the Secession body, about the extent of the Atonement, and God’s universal love to mankind. The result has been, that while the Synod expressed their disapprobation of the length to which some of their number had carried their views on these subjects, they appear to have adopted a considerable modification of the standards of the Church of Scotland, to which they still profess to adhere; and it is generally understood, that some of the ministers of that body decidedly hold the doctrine of universal Atonement.

Dr Wardlaw also published his views on the subject. He not only maintains the universality of the Atonement, but that men have “power” to believe and turn to God. We have already adverted to the effect this doctrine has had upon some of those who were studying under his direction. He had taken the first step; and although inclined to proceed no further, he found it not so easy to arrest the progress of the principles which he had laid down. Independently of the desire to maintain the truth of the Gospel, —for which I give Dr Wardlaw all credit, although I am convinced he has greatly erred, —he had many inducements, —which were not likely to be felt by his students, —to stop at the point he had reached. He knew that the absolute necessity of the teaching of the Spirit to lead fallen man into the truth, was universally held by believers in this country. He had long taught this doctrine; and any appearance of vacillation on the subject, would have greatly diminished, if not altogether destroyed, his reputation as an author and a preacher. But these motives did not weigh with his students. The world was new to them; and the desire of distinction, and of becoming the leaders of a new generation, rendered a novel doctrine peculiarly fascinating. Add to this, that the denial of the necessity of the work of the Spirit, accords better with the wisdom of this world, and promises to modify, if not to remove, the hitherto insuperable difficulty of God’s absolute sovereignty in the bestowment of salvation.

Hitherto the doctrine generally distinguished by the name of Calvinism, had been consistent. All mankind were condemned in Adam, —separated from God by the curse of the broken law, —having no more claim upon their Creator than the fallen angels. But in the exercise of his holy and adorable sovereignty, out of his own good pleasure, and for the manifestation of his own glory, He gave, in the everlasting council, an innumerable multitude of our fallen race to his Son, who undertook their cause, —became responsible for them as their Surety and Substitute, —and was in due time manifest in the flesh, that he might destroy the works of the devil, —might ransom them from the power of the grave, and redeem them from death. He bore their sins in his own body upon the tree, —commanded salvation to be preached to all nations in his name, and promised to be present with his servants in every age, not permitting his word to return to him void, but making it effectual for the gathering in of the ordained to eternal life; while its rejection by the greater part of those who heard it, should discover the malignity of sin, and the depth of that enmity against God, which is its genuine offspring.

Dr Wardlaw holds much of this truth, but he has been seduced from the high ground which he once occupied. He thought, provided he continued to maintain the doctrine of election, he could afford to grant to his opponents the universality of the Atonement, together with God’s love to all men, and his desire, (although not his purpose,) that they should be saved. As might have been expected, this has only encouraged others to proceed in the downward course, and resting upon the alleged fact, that Christ died for every child of Adam, in consequence of God’s love to the world, many now boldly deny both the doctrine of election, and the necessity of the influence of the Holy Spirit, which is inseparably connected with this mysterious truth.

We fully agree with Dr Wardlaw, that those who reject the Gospel, are most criminal. He again and again puts the question, “What would you have?” p. 152; and replies, that men have all the natural faculties necessary to constitute a ground of accountableness. He refers to the motives by which they are urged to receive salvation, and concludes by saying, that men’s inability “is the inability of disinclination, —of alienation of heart; moral inability.” But this moral inability is as absolute as natural inability. “The work of the Spirit,” says Dr Wardlaw, “is as essential to salvation as the work of Christ,” p. 173; and again, “I desire to be as zealous for the work of the Spirit, as for the work of Christ. The one, I repeat, is as necessary to salvation as the other. If we cannot be justified without the work of Christ, —neither can we be sanctified without the work of the Spirit. Nothing short of the Spirit’s power can effectually overcome that enmity, that aversion of heart, that rebellion of will, in which we consider human inability to consist; and in all cases in which this converting power operates, there is the following up of a Divine intention or purpose. It is according to the good pleasure of his will, — to the praise of the glory of his grace,” p. 177. What difficulty, then, is got rid of by universal Atonement? Supposing every sinner of mankind, from the fall, had heard the Gospel in all its purity and simplicity, not an individual, excepting those who were taught by the Spirit, would have been saved. Of what value, then, is universal Atonement? Does anyone reply, It discovers the enmity of the human heart against God? But does not the rejection of the unlimited proclamation of pardon through faith in Jesus, discover this enmity with equal dearness?

Dr Wardlaw may ask, How can proclamation be made of pardon for unatoned sin? We reply, there is no such proclamation; but pardon is proclaimed to all through faith in Christ, and the proclamation is made effectual by the Holy Spirit, for the salvation of all for whom the Atonement was made. Christ’s people have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; to others he will say, I never knew you: “ye believe not because ye are not of my sheep.” “My sheep hear my voice.” Thus men’s reception of the Gospel shows for whom the Atonement was made. Election is a secret thing which belongs to God, but the salvation of all who believe, without exception, is revealed to us. Here, then, is the difference between Dr Wardlaw and his opponents: “We hold,” he says, “that the sins of all men were imputed to Christ, and that this view secures the glory of God more fully in the offer of the Gospel, and in the actual salvation of God’s chosen.” If the sins of all men were imputed to Christ, and if his death were a sufficient expiation of these sins, all men must be saved. How is it possible that sin should be imputed both to the Substitute and to him whom he represented, both to the Surety and to him in whose behalf he had been accepted?

So far from being surprised at Dr Wardlaw’s teaching having led his students to deny the work of the Spirit, we should have been much astonished had it not produced this effect. They heard that the Atonement was made for all; they heard the question re-echoed, “What would you have?” and in reply, man’s faculties and powers were extolled. They were told, that to require to be “made willing,” was a “self-contradictory absurdity,” and they replied, This is enough; we neither want nor will accept of more; all the sins of mankind were expiated on Calvary, and there is no longer any bar in the sinner’s way. True, replies their teacher, “but the work of the Spirit is as essential to salvation as the work of Christ.” “If we cannot be justified without the work of Christ, —neither can we be sanctified without the work of the Spirit.” Why then do you ask us, “What would you have?” If the work of the Spirit be as necessary as the work of Christ, we would have “the sovereign efficacious influences of the Holy Spirit;” but we are satisfied with your elaborate induction of particulars, such as “our natural powers and faculties,” “our power of believing —of crediting what is attested by sufficient evidence,” our “natural power of loving and hating.” By all these, and many other considerations which you have presented to us, we are assured “nothing whatever, in the form of obstacle, lies in” our “way.” You have taught us that Christ “has shed his blood for sinners, and for you among the rest,” p. 154. These and many other considerations which you have brought forward, convince us that no supernatural work is necessary to our receiving the Gospel. Besides, in what does the work of the Spirit consist, which you affirm is “as essential to salvation as the work of Christ?” —not surely in making men willing in the day of his power? —not in working in them to will and to do of his good pleasure, by receiving the love of the truth, that they may be saved? for you tell us that to require to be made willing, is a self-contradictory absurdity. Stop, says Dr Wardlaw; I never said so; what I said, was, that “your being made willing” was not “necessary to your accountableness.” Our accountableness! they reply, we never for a moment called it in question! It is written in every page of the word of God; it is impressed upon our hearts in indelible characters. Your only object may have been to convince us of our accountableness; but your reasoning has satisfied us that the Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation, and that our will is free to choose the good and to refuse the evil. If the work of the Spirit be as essential to salvation as the work of Christ, an Atonement having been made for all, brings no one nearer to the kingdom of God, for without the sovereign efficacious work of the Spirit, there is an absolute impossibility of a sinner’s salvation; so that your opening a door of hope for all, is only uncovering a grave that the dead may come forth; it is lighting a candle that the blind may see; it is opening a door for a man without legs to walk out of prison.

Some of the Independent Churches take part with the students who, on account of the views they have adopted, were expelled from the Academy. Various publications have appeared, denying the doctrine of election, and the necessity of Divine influence in order to salvation. Here we plainly see the fruits of the doctrine of universal Atonement. Christ having purchased his Church with his own blood, is the key-stone of the arch, and when this is removed, the beauty and symmetry of the whole system are marred.

There is much more consistency in the Arminian system, from which election is excluded, and according to which the Spirit is given to all; but an insuperable difficulty in the way of both, is, that during eighteen hundred years, a very small part of mankind have heard the glad tidings of salvation. Dr Jenkyn will tell us, this does not prevent the salvation of virtuous heathens; but the Holy Ghost teaches us, that those that are without Christ, are without hope in the world.

We have already examined Dr Wardlaw’s doctrine of God’s universal love, —love to mankind —& love which issues, as he must admit, in the everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and the glory of his power, of the far greater part of its objects! Whom the Lord loveth he loveth to the end; so that the doctrine of his universal love to mankind, and his desire for their salvation, naturally and unavoidably leads to the doctrine of universal restoration. To this, I have no doubt, the present speculations are rapidly tending; it is indeed, the legitimate issue of universal Atonement. If the Atonement were made for all, and if it were sufficient for those for whom it was made, all must be saved. “He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him freely give us all things?” Rom. viii. 32. Who shall lay anything to the charge of those for whom Jesus died? ver. 33. Whether he died for the elect or for all, one thing is certain, he was raised again for the justification of those for whom he died, Rom. iv. 25. They are justified by his blood, and much more shall they be saved from wrath through him. When they were enemies, they were reconciled to God by the death of his Son; and much more, being reconciled, they shall be saved by his life, Rom. v. 9, 10.

The Scriptures teach us that there must be heresies, in order that those who are approved may be made manifest. By the winds of doctrine, which are at present passing over this country, the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. There is every appearance of multitudes being turned from the profession of the faith once delivered to the saints, which they have hitherto appeared to hold; but others will be led to more decided views of the truth. They will perceive more plainly the intimate connexion of every part of the doctrine of Christ. They will see more clearly how one part depends upon another, while the whole unites to complete one grand and harmonious plan; which, although for surpassing the full comprehension of men or angels, shall forever stand an imperishable monument of the manifold wisdom of God.

CONCLUSION.

IN concluding our remarks upon this most important subject, it may not be improper to contrast the two systems, —of Christ having laid down his life for all mankind, —and his having borne the sins of his people in his own body on the tree. It is not for a moment supposed that either system is free of difficulty; were this the case, it would afford a demonstration that it is not according to truth; for we must receive the kingdom of God as little children, —we must cease from our own wisdom, and become fools that we may be wise. Every natural principle in our hearts is opposed, to the way of salvation by faith in Jesus Christ. Man was made to live by obedience, and every feeling of his mind constantly prompts him, guilty and polluted as he is, to recur to the deeds of the law for acceptance with God. That the man which doeth these things shall live in them, is not only the language of Moses, but of every one’s natural conscience; and Christ is never seen as the end of the law for righteousness to the believer, till our high imaginations are cast down, and we are convinced of sin by the Holy Spirit. This was beautifully illustrated in Israel by the law of the leper. When a person was suspected of being afflicted with that loathsome disease, he was brought to the priest, who decided upon his case according to the law. The man who had a spot of a particular description, was pronounced unclean; but if the leprosy “covered all his flesh,” he was clean, Lev. xiii. 13. We all know that we are sinners, — our heart condemns us; but to feel that in us, that is, in our flesh, dwelleth no good thing, we must be taught of God. When Jesus manifests himself to us in a way he doth not to the world, — when he gives us the knowledge of salvation by the remission of our sins, —when God establishes his covenant with us, —showing us that he is pacified towards us for all that we have done, then, and not till then, do we abhor ourselves, and repent in dust and ashes. We then feel, not only that we have spots, but that we are utterly vile and polluted. But while the things of the Spirit must be foolishness to the natural man, the doctrine of universal Atonement, viewed in connexion with personal election, so far from removing difficulties, increases them ten-fold.

In contrasting the two systems, we begin with what is termed, PARTICULAR REDEMPTION. Those who hold it, maintain that mankind were created, fell, and were condemned in Adam, the head of the covenant or constitution which God gave to the human race. All are, in consequence, shapen in iniquity and conceived in sin, and are by nature the children of wrath. The truth of this is not proposed to us as a subject of debate and discussion, but is authoritatively declared by God, —it is confirmed by the universal depravity of mankind, and by the death of infants before they are capable of discerning good or evil. Immediately after the fall, God made known his purposes of mercy through a suffering and victorious Redeemer, at the same time intimating that salvation was to be restricted to one of the two great families into which mankind were divided.

In the fulness of time, the Saviour appeared in the character of the second Adam, —the Head and Surety of the new covenant, having taken part in flesh and blood with the seed of the woman, —the children whom God had given him. After having afforded the most abundant evidence that he was the promised Saviour, he voluntarily submitted to that death which the law of God had pronounced accursed. In his death he was the Substitute of his people, whose sins were laid upon him, and which were all washed away in his peace-speaking blood. Having been delivered for their offences, he was raised for their justification, and, as their great High-Priest and Advocate, sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty on high, being exalted a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and the remission of sins. He ever liveth to make intercession for all who come unto God by him; and his intercession is ever prevalent, being founded on the perfection of the sacrifice which he offered on the cross, by which the guilt of his people was forever cancelled. As the reward of his obedience unto death, he is, in the nature in which he suffered, invested with all power in heaven and in earth, that he might give eternal life to as many as God had given him, and whom he had redeemed from the curse of the law, by being made a curse for them. He brings them under the sound of the Gospel, —makes them willing in a day of power, —manifests himself to them in a way he does not to the world, thus creating in them a clean heart, and renewing a right spirit within them. He will finally receive them all into his eternal kingdom and glory, and, before an assembled universe, will say to his Father, “Behold I and the children whom thou hast given me.” Such is a brief view of the doctrine of the word of God in regard to the Atonement of Christ.

The advocates of UNIVERSAL ATONEMENT admit man’s creation, fall, and condemnation in Adam, and the consequent universal depravity of mankind. They admit that there is salvation for sinners only in Christ. They affirm that he made Atonement for all mankind; but such is man’s depravity, that not one of the human race would have escaped, had not God, before the foundation of the world, chosen in Christ a multitude which no man shall be able to number, who are saved by faith in Christ, produced by the operation of the Spirit. Both schemes agree, in maintaining that the elect, and the elect alone, shall be saved; but while the adherents of the one maintain that the Atonement was made for all, they hold that it does not remove the guilt of any, but merely lays a foundation for the general invitations of the Gospel, which, they allege, could not have been made, had not an universal Atonement been offered. To this it is replied, that an Atonement which does not cancel guilt, is no Atonement —it is a contradiction in terms that, in order to preach peace to sinners through Jesus Christ, there is no necessity for an universal Atonement, since, by the Gospel, sinners are merely invited and commanded to trust in the blood of Jesus for pardon and eternal life,—and thus the elect are separated from the reprobate by the Gospel, which is to the one the power of God unto salvation, and to the other a stumbling-block and foolishness. The former receive the love of the truth that they may be saved, —the latter, through the depravity of their hearts, reject the counsel of God against themselves. If the Gospel be hid from any, it is because they are lost, —they are the seed of the serpent; the Lord, who knoweth them that are his, never knew them; He gives them up to their own hearts’ lust, and they walk in their own counsels.

It is evident, that if the general invitations of the Gospel be inconsistent with limited Atonement, they must be equally so with personal election. It is admitted on both sides, that none ever did or will receive the love of the truth, excepting the elect; to what purpose, then, preach the Gospel to all? The answer is, God has been pleased to appoint, that by the Gospel the elect should receive repentance unto life. Is there any greater difficulty in holding that those for whom the Atonement was offered, are made manifest precisely in the same manner?

An insuperable objection to the doctrine of universal Atonement, is, that comparatively few of the children of men ever hear of a Saviour. Dr Wardlaw tells us, if the Atonement were not made for all, the salvation of the non-elect is a natural impossibility; what, then, will he say of those who never heard the Gospel? Exclusion from the means of grace is not a new thing on the earth; it is not peculiar to the period since the Atonement was made. From the time the Saviour was first announced, the proportion of those who enjoyed the means of salvation has been comparatively small. From the flood to the coming of Christ, the knowledge of God was confined to one family, and since his ascension but few have been favoured with the Gospel. The word of God has been taken out of the hands even of the greater part of those who are called Christians, and the doctrine of Jesus is buried under a mass of traditions and inventions which turn men from the truth.

To what purpose, then, declaim about a limited Atonement involving a natural impossibility of salvation, when the Son of God has said, “He that believeth not shall be damned;” while the means of salvation are confined to a few, and this has been the case ever since the announcement of the coming of the Saviour!

Once more: The advocates of universal Atonement represent the salvation of Christ as an expedient. The God of the Scriptures is not a God of expedients. His counsel shall stand, and He will do all his pleasure. None of his “measures and expedients in Divine government” are “liable to entire failure.” The plans of the Almighty are not the sport of chance, nor can they be thwarted and counteracted. Our God makes no experiments. He resorts to no expedients for the fulfilment of his designs. Known unto God are all his works, from the beginning of the world. His plans have been gradually unfolding, since he created man in his own image. He determined that ALL things should be put under the feet of the Son of Man. Satan imagined that, should Adam rebel, this would be impossible; but he was caught in his own snare, —he fell into the pit which he had dug; and learned by experience, that the wrath of the rebel angels, as well as the adoration of those who surround His throne, must always result in the advancement of the Divine glory.

The new creation is the ultimate end and perfection of the old. The formation of mankind in Adam was the shadow of the creation of the sons of God in the Only Begotten. This shall be completed when Christ presents the Church to himself, a glorious Church, without spot or blemish. All his brethren, —the seed of the woman, —shall overcome “by the blood of the Lamb.” Their Glorious Head was brought from the dead, and “by his own blood entered in once into the holy place;” and thither he shall be followed by an innumerable company, for whom he hath obtained “eternal redemption.”

We see a beautiful harmony between the old and new creation. That was not first which was spiritual, but that which was natural; and afterwards that which was spiritual. The first man was of the earth earthy; the second Man is the Lord from heaven. This is in some measure analogous to the creation of the world. When the dry land appeared, the vegetable kingdom was called into existence. Fishes and fowls were then made; afterwards cattle and living creatures; and then Adam, in his Maker’s image. Thus we behold a gradual progression in the work of creation, advancing from the formation of matter to that of him who was constituted the head of the lower world. The same plan was pursued in the work of redemption. When darkness covered the earth, mercy dawned upon this benighted world, in the curse upon the serpent; and as the shining light shineth more and more to the perfect day, so the way of salvation was gradually unfolded, till the darkness was past, and the true light shone forth, by the manifestation of the Son of God. He ascended to glory, and by the outpouring of the Spirit, led the Apostles into all the truth; thus qualifying them for throwing open the kingdom of God, as well as securing the success of their preaching, by his promised presence and blessing.

This gradual development is apparent in the call of Abraham, in God’s dealings with his posterity, and in the kingdom and ordinances established in Israel. It was a parable for the time then present. Thus we see that in all the conduct of God towards our world, he has proceeded from comparatively small beginnings to the fuller manifestation of his power and wisdom; and this exactly corresponds with the highest proof of his wisdom and power in the establishment of the everlasting kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ. The new heavens and new earth, in which dwelleth righteousness, shall by-and-by be completed, and a higher note of praise will hail the consummation of the mystery of God.

Meantime, the word of God shall not return to him void; it shall accomplish what he pleaseth, and prosper in the thing whereto he sent it. The election shall receive the love of the truth, thus proving that they were redeemed from the curse of the law, and ransomed from death by the blood of the Lamb; while the rejection of the Gospel by multitudes, will prove that Christ never knew them—that they belonged to another family, and were, in the righteous judgement of God, left to perish in their sins. Fallen man had no more claim on God than the fallen angels; and if He showed unmerited favour to a part of our ruined race, who shall say to him, in regard to those that are lost, “What doest thou?” Is it not lawful for him to do what he will with his own? The day of the revelation of his righteous judgement is approaching, and then shall he be justified in his sayings, and overcome when he is judged; his righteousness shall be brought forth as the light, and his judgement as the noon-day.

APPENDIX.

Reply to Dr Payne's Arguments

THOSE who have learned their divinity from the Word of God, must be struck on the perusal of Dr Payne’s Lectures, with the difference between his mode of teaching, and that of the Scripture. The former plunges his readers into the depths of metaphysics; the latter uses great plainness of speech, and instead of entangling us in the mazes of philosophical reasoning, in the simplest language announces the truth as it is in Jesus.

I began my work on the Atonement by pointing out the danger of blending metaphysics with Scripture truth, and attempting to remove the offence of the cross. Dr Payne’s Lectures afford a practical illustration of the importance of both these principles.

The Scripture informs us, that we must receive the kingdom of God as little children, otherwise we cannot enter it; if we desire to be wise we must become fools, must cease from our own wisdom, and be satisfied with knowing that such things are, without too curiously inquiring how they can be. “We are fools for Christ’s sake,” says the Apostle, “but ye are wise in Christ.” By blending the philosophy of Greece with the doctrine of Christ, the Corinthians in part escaped the reproach of the cross, but it was at the expense of their minds being corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. The Colossians are cautioned against being spoiled “through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ;” and I cannot but consider these and similar passages peculiarly applicable to the mode of teaching adopted by Dr Payne, upon whose views of the Atonement I propose to make some remarks.

The people of Scotland have been considered to be rather partial to metaphysical investigation. Among them our author commenced his ministry, and whether it was, that by exceeding in their favourite department he did not attain popularity as a preacher, or from some other cause, he removed to England, and appears to retain some degree of displeasure against those who did not sufficiently appreciate his talents. He writes in a style which indicates no very friendly feeling to “the wise men of the North” and “the ultra-Calvinists of the North.”

If we mistake not, Dr Payne attributed his want of success to the people of Scotland’s attachment to Sandemanianism; he repeatedly intimates his disapprobation of that system, and even speaks of it in connexion with Socinianism, with which it has no affinity. On the Divinity and Atonement of Christ, Sandeman was clear. But the name of Sandemanianism has long been employed in England as a bugbear, in order to excite prejudice against whatever was viewed with disapprobation. My sentiments on Sandemanianism are given in a Letter to the Editor of the Evangelical Magazine, inserted in the number for May 1846, p. 249. The object of the letter was to vindicate my late brother and myself from the charge of having encouraged the putting of Sandeman’s works into the hands of the students educated at his seminary, and to express my astonishment that the late heresies in the Scottish Congregational churches should be ascribed, in a paper which had appeared in the Magazine, to the influence of my brother’s classes, at the distance of fifty years; at the same time, I stated as a matter of fact, “that very few of the students of those classes had turned out ill.” In a note appended to my Letter, the Editor says, “We cannot at the same time vouch so strongly as Mr. Haldane seems to do, for the full orthodoxy of all the men who attended the classes to which he refers.” I never hinted that all had turned out well; I said, “very few —turned out ill.” The Editor proceeds, “We are old enough to remember the speculative tendency of the preaching of not a few of them, and how much they insisted on Sandeman’s notion of saving faith being a naked assent to the truth.” Now, Dr Payne, in what are termed in the Evangelical Magazine, his “invaluable lectures,” which are noticed with unqualified approbation, affirms with Sandeman, that “faith, strictly speaking, is the belief of the Gospel,” p. 269. ”Strictly speaking, faith supposes a testimony, and is the credit we give to testimony,” p. 270. He endeavours to prove a difference between himself and Sandeman, by condemning those who represent faith as an assent to the great facts of the Gospel, and affirms that there can exist no saving faith, “when the scriptural import and moral glory of these facts are not clearly discerned and powerfully realized.” This he says, “is the extreme to which Sandemanianism tends, if it has not exactly reached it,” p. 274. Now Sandeman agrees with him, that faith is the belief of “the meaning” of the Gospel. He would not have acknowledged a Socinian to be a believer although he admitted that Jesus was the Son of God, because he attaches to the term a different meaning from that contained in the Scriptures of truth.

Every doctrine of the Gospel may be viewed as a matter of fact, —the divinity of Christ, regeneration, justification, sanctification; and if these are not believed as they are exhibited in the Scripture, there can be no saving faith.[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡]  Sandeman did not deny the absolute necessity of the power of the Holy Spirit in the production of faith. Indeed, he carried this to an extreme, discouraging all concern in the unconverted about their souls, as tending to Pharisaism and self-righteousness. He held, with Dr Payne, that “whatever be the nature of a report, the act of believing it is the same,” p. 284. Dr Payne maintains that “faith is an intellectual act, and an intellectual act alone.” He tells us that when the Apostle speaks of believing with the heart, “he obviously means an unfeigned faith, in opposition to a mere verbal profession of faith.” He denies that faith is an exercise of the affections, “for it is not more absurd to say that we perceive with the affections, and love with the intellect, or see with the nose, than to maintain that we literally believe with the heart,” p. 283. This comes very near Sandeman’s notion of a naked assent to truth being saving faith, and might have excited the displeasure of the Editor of the Evangelical Magazine; but in his remarks on the Lectures we were reminded of the homely proverb, that one man may, with impunity steal a sheep, while another is hanged for looking over the hedge.

Our author tells us that, “as far as an unconverted man can understand the Gospel, he may believe it,” p. 275. Yes, but no unconverted man can understand the Gospel. He may indeed talk with accuracy upon all the doctrines of the Gospel, just as a man born blind may talk accurately of light and colours, but he does not attach the true meaning to the terms he employs, nor is it possible he should, till his eyes are opened. The case of an unconverted man is precisely the same, only the latter is guilty, while the other is not.

Throughout his work, Dr Payne has referred to Dr Marshall and myself, and has classed us together in his animadversions on the subject of the Atonement. I believe our sentiments in many respects coincide, but without the smallest disrespect for Dr Marshall, I think it right to say that, till I saw Dr Payne’s lectures, I had not read anything which Dr Marshall has written on the subject, with the exception of the extracts in Dr Wardlaw’s publication. In these, Dr Marshall appeared to me to concede so much to his opponents, as to render his views of particular redemption, (or as Dr Payne would say, particular atonement) untenable. I afterwards heard with great pleasure that he had retracted those admissions; but at that time my work was so far advanced, that I did not think it necessary to examine his later publication.

I mention this to show that Dr Marshall and I were not cognizant of each other’s sentiments, and to protest against our being classed together, and thus each being made responsible for the views expressed by the other. In saying this, I have no intention to insinuate the slightest disapprobation of any of Dr Marshall’s statements, which, so far as I know, nearly correspond with my own.

Besides various remarks in the body of his work, on my late publication on the Atonement, Dr Payne has, in an Appendix, considered some of my statements, but contents himself with incidental strictures, without entering on the proofs I adduced in support of my views. A second edition of my work being called for, I take the opportunity of referring to what he has brought forward; at the same time observing, that the foundation of my system is unshaken, I might say, unassailed.

I premise, that while Dr Payne is very much disposed to charge his opponents with using strong language, he is far from being careful to avoid personalities. The charges of dogmatism, Antinomianism, ultra-Calvinism,[§§§§§§§§§§§] and being “utterly stolid,” are freely brought forward, and he predicts that in all probability, I shall very soon be driven to give up addressing the Gospel to all who come under its sound. It may therefore give him pleasure to be informed that I have held, that the good Shepherd laid down his life for the sheep, and for them alone, and at the same time commanded the Gospel to be preached to every creature, from a period (I should suppose) anterior to Dr Payne having commenced his metaphysical studies; and although, I hope I am not too old to learn, I feel no disposition to abandon or modify either the one sentiment or the other: I hold both to be most important.

Here I would refer once for all, to the charge of Antinomianism, so frequently brought by Dr Payne against those who hold scriptural views of the Atonement. Without the slightest desire of boasting, (for according to the Apostle, a boaster and a fool are synonymous, 2 Cor. xi. 16.) I am bold to affirm, that my conviction of the obligation of the holy, just, and good law of God, upon believers, and upon all mankind, is not less strong than that of Dr Payne. To himself rather than to me the imputation of Antinomianism is applicable. He represents God as treating the righteous One as if he were guilty, and the guilty as if they were righteous, thus making void the law, and denying the essential justice of the Almighty. I would at the same time remind him, that calling names has nothing to do with our inquiries after truth, and only proves a lurking suspicion of the weakness of our cause. Dr Payne, to do him justice, writes with sufficient coolness, but this is rather an aggravation of such epithets, as “Antinomians” which he so frequently applies to those who maintain that Christ, who knew no sin, was made sin for his people, that they might be made the righteousness of God in him.

P. 36. — We have an example of our author’s darkening counsel in the assertion, that “in strict accuracy it cannot be said God directly decrees that any man shall believe the Gospel, and persevere unto the end, and inherit eternal life.” Does not God predestinate some to the adoption of children, and to be conformed to the image of his Son? Has he not chosen them to salvation? Did he not promise eternal life to the sheep whom he gave to Christ, and whom none shall pluck out of the hand of the good Shepherd?

P. 89—We are told that the first transgression did not bring “directly on the race a sentence to eternal death,” and reference is made to the author’s lectures on original sin. I have not at present access to this book, neither do I know whether this sentiment involves the denial of the eternal punishment of those who die in their sins, but certainly it appears less difficult to suppose that the sentence of eternal death was denounced against the first transgression, than that it was passed after mankind had become utterly corrupted. But it is abundantly evident, that our author’s fundamental error is not perceiving the state into which mankind were brought by Adam’s sin.

The sentence upon disobedience was death, not the separation of soul and body, —for this was not denounced till after the intimation of the coming of the Saviour, Gen. iii. 19; —but separation from God, and the loss of his savour which is life; now, since God is unchangeable, had he not had purposes of mercy to a part of our fallen race, the separation must have been eternal. In consequence of the sentence, men are dead while they live, dead in trespasses and sins, and if grace prevent not, infallibly continue to treasure up for themselves wrath against the day of wrath; for as in them, that is in their flesh, dwelleth no good thing, the carnal mind CANNOT be subject to the law of God, it is therefore IMPOSSIBLE that of themselves they should ever turn to God.

Separation from God was the curse which Christ endured, and which extorted from him that loud and bitter cry, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me!” This would have been utter destruction to the most exalted creature —for in God all creatures live, move, and have their being; but Jesus is God over all. He bowed to the storm, he obeyed the commandment, he voluntarily laid down his life, that he might take it again, and rose to the power of an endless life; and now the reins of universal dominion are committed to him, that he may gather his “beautiful flock” around his throne. For a small moment his Father forsook his only Begotten, in wrath did He hide his face from him for a moment, but with everlasting kindness did He visit him. Because he humbled himself and became obedient to death, even the death of the cross, God hath exalted him at his own right hand; and all, without exception, is put under his feet.

Here we may refer to our Lord’s declaration, “As the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.” This does not refer to Jesus in his divine nature, “for in him was life,” it dwelt in him as its fountain; but the life which the Father gave him, was in his mediatorial character, as the Head of his body the Church. In connexion with giving him to have life in himself, a gift which could not have been bestowed on any creature, for it would have rendered it in a great measure independent of its Creator —the Father commanded him to lay it down. This he did upon the cross. It was altogether a voluntary act, an act of obedience to Him from whom he had received the gift. Having tasted the vinegar, and knowing that all which had been written of him was fulfilled, he cried with a loud voice, “It is finished!” proving that life was “yet whole” in him. He did not take a single step in the great work he had undertaken, without his Father’s authority, but obeyed his commandment, both in laying down and in taking his life again, and thus became the overflowing source of life to all his people. The life derived from Adam is forfeited —it is gone —men are dead; but the life of those whom Jesus is not ashamed to call brethren, is hid with Christ in God; and when Christ, who is their life, shall appear, then shall they also appear with him in glory.

In p. 91, we are told, “all men have power to secure their salvation, if they are disposed to use that power as they ought to do.” And have they not the same power to obey the law? Who compels them to violate it? Rowland Hill used to say, “A swine may feed as cleanly as a sheep if it pleases, but the disposition is wanting; it is pleased to wallow in the mire, and thus it will continue till its nature is changed.”

Our author lays much stress on the distinction of God as a Sovereign and as a Moral Governor, “in one of which relations it may be competent for him to do what, in the other, would either be inexpedient or improper,” p. 100. However important this distinction may seem in the opinion of Dr Payne, it is not acknowledged in the word of God. God is one; He rules the nations by his power, and does in the army of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth, what seemeth good in his sight. He is carrying forward that wondrous plan by which his manifold wisdom shall be known by the Church to the principalities and powers in heavenly places. He is angry with the wicked every day; He hateth all workers of iniquity; He has appointed that men should once die, and after death the judgement. And what addition is made to our knowledge of God by dwelling on the various characters which he sustains as a Moral Governor and a Sovereign, and haranguing about his “public character,” and saying, we have a claim upon this in equity from God as a Moral Governor; another thing he bestows in a different character? What does such arguing prove? What is it more than “words, words, words,” calculated to puff us up with a show of wisdom. It is the shadow, not the substance of knowledge.

In p. 136, We are told that “peace was made by the blood of the cross. God was reconciled to the world by the death of his Son; reconciled even to those whose hearts are enmity against him.” Is God indeed reconciled to the wicked! Does He look with complacency on those of whom he says, “their foot shall slide in due time,” on “the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction,” whom he endures “with much long suffering?” This assertion of Dr Payne is the more remarkable, from his quoting a passage of Gilbert on the Atonement, admitting the soundness of the interpretation which refers the reconciliation described, 2 Cor. v. 19, “to a changed relation between God and the redeemed.” In this passage we are expressly taught, that their trespasses are not imputed to the world, which God was in Christ reconciling to himself, and the word of reconciliation is the fan by which the world, which was reconciled to God, is distinguished from the world which lieth in wickedness. The former world are the sheep of Christ, “redeemed to God by his blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.” They therefore hear his voice, they receive the reconciliation or Atonement, and he gives them eternal life; they shall never perish, nor shall any pluck them out of his hand.

The great high priest made “reconciliation for the sins of the people,” Heb. ii. 17, and ascended to the right hand of God to make intercession for them. Dr Payne admits, that “the priesthood of Christ includes the sacrifice which he presented to God on earth, and the intercession which he carries on in heaven,” p. 131. “The priesthood of Christ,” he says, “is a comprehensive phrase, descriptive of all that was done by him in reference to God himself, with a view to the healing of the breach.” But according to his system, Christ acted as a priest to all mankind in offering the sacrifice, and only to a part of mankind in making intercession, John xvii. 9. Is Christ then divided?

P. 167, all the obstacles to the pardon of sin, we are told, “grew out of the rectoral character and relation of God to men. Personally considered, there was no reluctance in him to pardon, but intense desire to do it.” Why then is this “intense desire” not gratified? Was not Infinite Wisdom competent to gratify the desire? Was it beyond the power of the Almighty to give to every sinner of mankind repentance unto life as he actually gives to his elect? The elect are naturally no better than others, —their hearts are no less hard. The power by which Christ was raised from the dead, which is exerted in the conversion of every believer, Eph. i. 19. 20, was certainly sufficient to quicken every child of Adam to whom, according to our author, God was reconciled by the death of his Son. Why then, considering the “intense desire” in the Divine mind to pardon the sins of all mankind for whom a sacrifice of infinite value had been offered, does God confine the gift of repentance unto life to a remnant, while he so intensely desires the salvation of all. Nay, how comes it that the Gospel —containing the revelation of the only name given under heaven whereby men can be saved, —is known only to a fragment of the human race! It is idle to tell us God has not confined the Gospel; that it is the fault of the Church. Let the Church be ever so faulty, it seems a very extraordinary feature of moral government, that the great bulk of mankind should perish eternally from the sloth or folly of a remnant, while He who “worketh all things after the counsel of his own will,” has “an intense desire” for their salvation. When we attempt to explain God’s dealings by our own shallow reasonings, we uniformly involve ourselves in greater difficulties than those we sought to escape. In every age, men professing themselves wise have become fools, and thus has revelation been corrupted from the beginning, Rom. i. 21.

P. 226. We are told the Gospel may be compared to a medicine, and says our author, “had it been the purpose of Jehovah to render it effectual universally, what could have prevented the perfect restoration to health of every individual of the human family?” But all had an insuperable dislike to the medicine, so that none could be cured but those “from whose minds Jehovah determined to remove that dislike, which would lead to its rejection.” Now, surely if God had an “intense desire” to cure the whole human family, he would have removed the dislike not from a few, but from all; more especially as the Atonement made for all had removed every obstacle, with the exception of dislike of the medicine. But in fact, only a small proportion of the diseased ever hear of the medicine.

Our author admits, that Christ did not die with the “intention” of rendering his Atonement the means of salvation to all men, else all men must be saved. What difficulty then is got rid of by universal Atonement? It throws the responsibility of rejecting it on the sinner. Who denies this? Pardon through faith in the blood of Christ is proclaimed to all who hear the Gospel, and by the power of the Holy Ghost, faith is produced in those for whom the Atonement was made. In other words, those who were chosen in Christ from everlasting are made willing in the day of his power. Here, while rejection of the Gospel proves the desperate wickedness of the heart of fallen man, and the awful consequences of the sin of Adam, winch utterly corrupted all his posterity and filled them with enmity against God, —enmity implacable, which his almighty power alone is competent to subdue —His sovereign grace is exhibited in plucking an innumerable multitude as brands from the burning, and at the same time placing in the strongest light both his justice and mercy which appeared irreconcilable, thus proclaiming to the universe that with God all things are possible.

In exact correspondence with this, Christ will say to those whom he is not ashamed to call brethren, “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world,” while he will say to others “Depart, from me,” and will prove the propriety of the sentence by the fruits of righteousness produced by those who had been graded into the good olive tree, and the wickedness of those whom he gave up to their own hearts’ lust.

P. 175. We are told Christ was “treated as if he had been the sinner,” and that he “died the death of the sinner.” Here is another singular feature of moral government —a righteous person is treated as the sinner, and dies the death of the sinner. Is God’s judgement then not according to truth? “Whoever perished being innocent, or when were the righteous cut off?” Job iv. 7. Is there unrighteousness with God? Does he condemn the just, and justify the wicked! It must be so, if Christ suffered the consequences, without the imputation of the guilt, of sin. But He who knew no sin was made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. In this wonderful transaction are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Into this manifestation of the wisdom and power of God the angels desire to look. This is the mystery of the creation and fall of mankind in Adam. Here we see the love of Christ which passeth knowledge; the Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all. But according to Drs Payne Wardlaw, and Jenkyn, this amazing plan is frittered down to the “expedient” of the suffering of an innocent person, and the justification of a multitude who have drank up iniquity as the ox drinketh up water, and who having once been guilty, can never cease to be so.

I may here observe, that our author’s views of the imputation of sin are most unscriptural, and derogatory to the Divine character. He asserts that bearing sin means only bearing its consequences, not its guilt.

This is directly opposed to the doctrine of the Word of God. It is not by arbitrary imputation that Adam’s sin becomes ours, or that our sins become Christ’s, or Christ's righteousness ours. Adam’s sin and Christ’s righteousness must have been ours, before it was imputed by Him that judgeth righteously. We were all one with Adam, in virtue of the constitution which it pleased God to give to the human race. Hence we existed in him, and were responsible for his disobedience. So Christ’s righteousness belongs to his people, on account of his voluntary union with them, and consequent substitution in their place. God imputes to us Adam’s guilt, because we were really guilty in Adam; and it is because Christ’s people are righteous in him, that God justifies them, and treats them as righteous; else there would be unrighteousness with God. In both cases, unity is the ground of imputation. When a just judge charges a prisoner with guilt, and condemns him to punishment, he does not make him guilty, but finds him so, and punishes him for his crime. So it is with Him who is “most just.” He does not impute Adam’s sin to his posterity, and thus make it ours, but He finds Adam’s guilt upon us, and therefore imputes or places it to our account. God does not reckon sin or righteousness ours, till it is actually ours. It is asked, How can we be answerable for Adam’s sin, which was committed ages before we were born? The answer is, “Thus it is written.” God declares the fact, and who shall presume to reply. He is a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is He. We know little of his procedure; his way is in the sea, and his path in the great waters, and his footsteps are not known; but the day of the revelation of the righteous judgement of God is approaching, when we shall no longer see through a glass darkly, but face to face.

It must be admitted that our bodies spring from Adam, and that the seeds of disease and death are thus communicated from generation to generation. Such is the fact; but human wisdom cannot comprehend it. So in the matter of original sin, there is nothing inconsistent with reason, although we cannot explain it. Adam was the natural root of all his posterity; this is undeniable; why may he not equally be the moral and legal head of his posterity? When he sinned he felt himself naked; a change had evidently passed on his body; and we are born in his fallen image, in his likeness, and it is still more evident that our hearts are corrupt. We were then in Adam not only seminally, but morally. There is a transmission of mind as well as of body. The whole is a mystery; we cannot fathom it; our only safety consists in adhering to the Scriptures of truth; and to learn both by what God has concealed, and by what He has revealed, that we are of yesterday, and know, nothing.

p. 177. —Our author supposes that the awful and affecting view of the evil of sin which the Lord had upon the cross, in addition to his deep sense of shame, and his acute bodily sufferings, constituted the intervening cloud which hid from him his Father’s face. But why was the Lord so affected with the evil of sin, if it was not laid upon him? How comes he to say that his iniquities had taken hold on him? so that he could not look up, that they were more in number than the hairs of his head, therefore his strength failed him, Ps. xl. 12; again, “O God, thou knowest my foolishness; and my sins are not hid from thee,” Ps. lxix. 5. Thus did the seed of the woman, the Son of Man, restore that which he took not away. Here we see the weaving of that spotless web, in which all whom he is not ashamed to call brethren shall stand before Him who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, and who cannot look upon sin.

P. 181, at the conclusion of the lecture, Dr Payne speaks more scripturally; he tells us His agony on the cross resulted “from the burden of our guilt which rested upon him.” This is something more than bearing the consequence of our sin. Bearing iniquity, no doubt, includes punishment; but not independently of guilt. Under God’s most righteous government, guilt and punishment are inseparable, although the latter may not be speedily inflicted. Here I presume, is one point of difference between Dr Payne and those who hold the particularity of the Atonement. By our guilt he means that of all mankind, while they consider it to refer to the guilt of God’s people, Is. liii. 8. If the guilt of all were laid on him, and if his sufferings were expiatory, then THE GUILT OF ALL IS CANCELLED, OR THE EXPIATION WAS INADEQUATE.

P. 193. — Speaking of the sacrifice of the sin-offering on the great day of atonement, our author justly observes that there was a “symbolical transference of the guilt of the transgressor to the victim.” Surely then, the symbol was fulfilled in the sacrifice of Christ; for the Jewish sacrifices served “unto the example and shadow of heavenly things.” If there was a symbolical transference of the guilt of Israel according to the flesh on the great day of atonement, when the high-priest laid his hands on the head of the scapegoat, confessing the sins of the people; there must have been a real transference of the guilt of the true Israel, when Jesus hung upon the cross. The Gentiles had no concern with the Jewish expiation. The names of the twelve tribes, not of the Gentile nations, were inscribed on the breastplate of the high-priest. The sacrifice was for Israel alone, and the truth of the figure consists in the type being fulfilled in that sacrifice by which all the true Israel are justified.

P. 198. — We are told “the load of our guilt sank him to the dust of death. How then could he have risen again, had not that guilt been cancelled by his death?” Again it is asked, “Would he have given the sinner’s Surety this full and complete discharge, if the Surety had not paid the sinner’s debt” Certainly not; but Christ is the Surety of the new covenant, Heb. vii. 22, and consequently, only of the children of that covenant. But if Christ were the Surety of all men, all received a discharge in his resurrection, and thus universal Atonement conducts us to its necessary consummation, universal salvation; for Christ was raised for the justification of all those for whose offences he was delivered, Rom. iv. 25. Be they few or many, they were justified by his blood, and much more shall be saved from wrath through him. “If when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life,” Rom. v. 10. If there were not another explicit declaration in Scripture, this would be conclusive in proof of the Atonement having been made only for the heirs of salvation. Those for whom the death of the Son of God was an Atonement or reconciliation shall MUCH MORE be saved through his life, for he is at the right; hand of God, making intercession for them, and the Father heareth him always. If he paid the debt of all, —if the guilt of all be cancelled by his death, whence proceeds men's innate and utter depravity? It is the brand of uncancelled guilt.

P. 203. — “I presume,” says our author, “none will venture to say that when God gave his law to mankind, he did not intend it to be obeyed.” If this refer to the law given in paradise, I must decline answering the question; it is too high for me. What God thinketh in his heart, that he does. One thing is certain, while God is not tempted of evil, neither tempteth he any man, he did not intend that man should continue in innocence; Adam was the figure of Christ, in whom provision was made before the foundation of the world for the eternal redemption of those of whom he is the head. If Dr Payne refer to the law delivered to fallen man, it was “added because of transgression,”— “that the offence might abound,”—that “sin by the commandment, might become exceeding sinful,” “that every mouth might be stopped.” It was however obeyed in all its extent by the Lord Jesus, who also endured its curse for the deliverance of bin people, and consequently is to them the end of the law, so that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in them, Rom. viii. 4.

P. 207. — We are told the Atonement, strictly speaking, “was not made for one man, or for all men; it was to God for sin, that is, on account of sin.” Then it was made for an abstraction, or perhaps for the sin of the rebel angels, and Dr Wardlaw’s thousand rebel worlds. But the Scripture teaches that it was made for sinners of mankind, that through it God might gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad, John xi. 52. It is probably to guard us against viewing the Atonement in an abstract form, that while Christ is said to be “made sin,” to “put away sin,” he is said to suffer for “sins” 1 Pet. iii. 18, 1 John ii. 2; to make reconciliation for sins, Heb. ii. 17; x. 12, &c.

P. 208. — I am not careful to vindicate the consistency of the exhortations and threatenings addressed to mankind, and I have very little anxiety about justifying the propriety of all being invited to receive salvation, while the atonement was made only for a part of mankind.[************] I have observed in the preceding pages, that, while the Scripture declares that the death of Christ will be found amply sufficient for all who come to him, we never read of an indefinite sufficiency, which is so much insisted on by the advocates of universal Atonement. But the Apostle solves Dr Payne’s difficulty, when he says, “I endure all things for the elect’s sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.” All who come under the sound of the Gospel are freely invited, warned, and encouraged to flee from the wrath to come. None who come to Christ shall be rejected; but none do come, except the Father draw them. All others reject the counsel of God against themselves. I know this proceeds from moral, not physical inability, but it is not the less real, so that since the world began, no man ever did receive the love of the truth, or will receive it in future, but by the power of the Holy Ghost. The bones are very dry, and can only be quickened by the Spirit, communicated by the distinguishing love of God to “the vessels of mercy which he had afore prepared unto glory, even those whom he hath called not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles.”[††††††††††††] As to the question of the consistency of God's sovereignty and man’s responsibility, I am fully satisfied with knowing that both are true, but I am not called to reconcile them. This is a part of “the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world to our glory.”

P. 211. — The Gospel, it is said, “is the instrument of moral government to all.” Yet only a fragment of the human race ever heard the Gospel. Our author is shocked at the supposition that the design of the Gospel is “to secure the intentions of Sovereign mercy to the elected members of the human family,” and with great irreverence observes, that in this case he bears “to the non-elect, rather the relation of executioner than of judge or governor.” This proceeds upon the supposition which lies at the foundation of his system, that mankind had a claim upon God for the means of recovery. If so, salvation, or the means of salvation, is not of grace but of debt. The rebel angels had no means of returning to God afforded them; and why then should they be afforded to fallen man? If it be alleged, that while mankind fell in Adam, the angels fell individually, I reply, this is not in the record, and cannot be substantiated. If man had no claim upon God, who describes himself as having mercy on whom he will have mercy, then the salvation of the elect is purely of grace. They are redeemed with the precious blood of Christ from their former vain conversation. He declares that for their sakes he sanctifies himself, that they may be sanctified through the truth. He was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifested in these last times for those who by him do believe in God that raised him from the dead, and gave him glory, that their faith and hope might be in God, 1 Pet. i. 20, 21. Hence we have seen that the Apostle endured all things for the elect’s sake. What relation, in our author’s view, does God bear to those who sin without law, and perish without law? We are taught that all things are for the elect’s sake, 2 Cor. iv. 15. “All things are yours, whether Paul, Apollos, or Cephas—all are yours—and ye are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s,” 1 Cor. iii. 21. From the day of his ascension, the Lord has been gathering in his redeemed in the way most conducive to his own glory and their happiness.

We are told “it is imperative upon us to believe that after the fall Jehovah set open the door of mercy not to some men merely, but to all men.” Whence, then, has it been shut ever since men began to multiply upon the earth, upon the far greater part of the human race? One might suppose if it were incumbent on God to open the door, it must be equally incumbent to keep it open, which is far from being the case. Very few are favoured with the light of revelation. In point of fact, men’s state of probation, “strictly speaking,” is past; judgement has come upon all to condemnation, and had God dealt with the human race as he did with the rebel angels, his judgement would have been according to truth. This, and this alone solves the difficulty, by which so many are perplexed. No child of Adam had any claim upon God; the Gospel is the word of his grace. Had one sinner been saved, it would have been an act of pure grace; but a multitude which no man shall be able to number were chosen in Christ before the world was, and shall obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. In the salvation of the redeemed God does no man wrong, he does what he will with his own.

In reply to the question, “How can we so far libel the Great Eternal as to suppose that he invites sinners to leave their prison, and will condemn them hereafter for not doing it, if he has not set open the doors to permit their escape?” I ask, in my turn, Is it a libel to hold that God says respecting his most holy law, the man that doeth these things shall live in them; and, at the same time, informs us that by the deeds of the law no flesh living shall he justified? It may be said the law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, but comparatively few have an opportunity of hearing the name of Christ, and the faith which is essential to salvation cometh by hearing.

P. 216. —Our author asks, “Did not Christ command the Church to carry the Gospel into the whole world, and to preach it to every creature?” He then quotes an observation of mine, that the Church never had the power to do this. “That is,” he adds, “Christ enjoined the Church to do what is impossible. ”Softly, Dr Payne! Christ limited no period, and I have no doubt the commandment will yet be obeyed in all its extent, he tells us, “If many men are destitute of the revelation of this propitiation, that is the fault of the Church.” This is poor comfort to those who perish. The man who can get over the difficulty of Christ being “the propitiation for the sins of every man in the world that he has “reconciled God (God himself,) to the world,” and has an “intense desire” for the salvation of all men; and yet that the greater part of the world perish through “the fault of the Church,” may easily overstep the difficulty of a limited Atonement, and a general invitation to turn to God.

Does Dr Payne mean to affirm that, in the New Testament, the world always signifies the whole race of mankind? I have referred to many passages in which it cannot have this meaning. Why then does he lay so much stress on John iii. 16. The world, in this passage, evidently means men Of all nations, Jews and Gentiles; and I have shown that it was not only necessary for our Lord to teach the Jewish ruler that a new birth was an essential requisite for every subject of the kingdom of God which he had announced, but that, in this kingdom, there was to be neither Jew nor Greek. The original promise to Abraham was, that, in him, all the families of the earth should be blessed;[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] but the favour of God had been so long confined to Israel, that they entirely lost sight of His purposes of mercy to the Gentiles.

The Lord, in his discourse with Nicodemus, also referred to the brazen serpent, and explained the mystery of that transaction, declaring that whosoever believed should not perish but have eternal life. Had the Lord stopped here, Nicodemus would infallibly have confined the whosoever to the Jews, to prevent which, the Lord added, “for God so loved the world; and in connexion with this, again repeated that “whosoever believeth, which necessarily included not the Jews only, but also the Gentiles, Rom. iv. 11,16. Referring to my observations on Dr Wardlaw, Dr Payne charges me with forgetting that I am not a judge, but a counsel. Have I pretended to be a judge? I have stated, with all confidence, what I am fully convinced is the doctrine of the Word of God on the subject, but I have claimed no authority to decide this or any other controversy. I have stated my reasons for the view I take of the passage, which I consider unanswerable. I ask no man to walk by my light, but I am fully persuaded in my own mind. I neither unchristianize Dr Wardlaw nor any other man for differing from the view I take of the passage, but I have not the smallest doubt of his being in error on this subject. There is a considerable difference between the manner in which we hold truth and error. We may be strongly convinced of what we find afterwards to be completely wrong. Like Saul of Tarsus, we may verily think with ourselves that we ought to do what is improper, or we may conscientiously defend a sentiment which we afterwards discover to be erroneous; but when our mind gets hold of the truth on any particular subject on which we had been misled, we have a degree of confidence which we did not previously possess, however strong the language we may have made use of. Few, we apprehend, who are in the habit of attending to the workings of the human mind, will call in question the justness of this observation.

P. 218. —It is said to be as necessary for me “to limit the words Jews and Gentiles as the term world.” Doubtless it is, and this is done by the words “whosoever believeth.” If our author will again peruse the preceding pages, he will find various instances of such limitation; for instance, “salvation is come unto the Gentiles,” Rom. xi. 11. “The salvation of God is sent to the Gentiles, and they will hear it,” Acts xxviii. 28. “Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: Seeing it is one God which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith,” Rom. iii. 29, 30. And if in these and similar passages, the term Gentiles may and must be limited, why not the term world? It is asked by what authority I limit the terms? I reply, by the authority of many positive declarations of the Word of God, the general style of Scripture, and the matter of fact that God has hitherto given only to a small part of mankind the means of salvation.

Our author objects to the expression “the whole world,” 1 John ii. 2, being understood as referring to the Gentiles, and adduces a singular argument in opposition to this interpretation. He says, “the admonition —'little children, keep yourselves from idols,’ —decidedly proves, that if not intended principally for converted heathen, it was not addressed exclusively to converted Jews; for the Jews, after the Babylonish captivity were not prone to worship idols.” On this I observe, 1st, When Paul went to Jerusalem, Peter, James, and John agreed that he should go to the heathen, and they to the circumcision, Gal. ii. 9. And, therefore, while the epistles of these eminent servants of God were intended to edify believers in every age and country, we cannot doubt that they were primarily designed for believing Jews. The Epistles of Peter and James are expressly addressed to them, and although John’s First Epistle is not so addressed, yet as he was an Apostle of the circumcision, there is every reason to believe it was especially intended for them. 2dly, As to the Jews not being prone to worship idols, the Apostle’s object in the passage “little, children, keep yourselves from idols,” is to show that all are idolaters who do not worship the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; just as he says, “whosoever denieth the Son hath not the Father,” 1 John ii. 23; which exactly corresponds with our Lord’s declaration to the Jews, “it is my Father which honoureth me; of whom ye say that he is your God; yet ye have not known him,” John viii. 54, 55. Were these Jews keeping themselves from idols? Yet this took place after the “Babylonish captivity!” 3d, The Apostle Paul writing to the Romans, among whom were both Jews and Gentiles, says, “What shall we then say that Abraham, our father as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?” Rom. iv. 1. And again, when reproving Peter before all the brethren —consisting chiefly of Gentiles, as is evident from Gal. iv. 8—he said, “we who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law,” Gal. ii. 16. Why then should we doubt, that one of the Apostles of the circumcision should particularly refer to Christ being a propitiation for the sins of the whole world, whether Jews or Gentiles, Rev. v. 9. We have already quoted a passage of John’s Gospel, in which he informs us that the object of the death of Christ was to gather into one the children of God that were scattered abroad, John xi. 52. As to 1 John v. 19, the whole world cannot be understood universally, for it is contrasted with Christ's little flock.

P. 220. —I had noticed the impropriety of rendering the same verb in the same tense differently, in the two clauses of 2 Cor. v. 14, and said that it ought to have been rendered, “if one died for all, then all died.” Dr Payne observes, “however true it may be, that believers died in Christ,[§§§§§§§§§§§§] it clearly does not appear to be the truth of the text.” How does this appear? I deny, that “it is at variance with the context, and with the object and bearing of the whole statement.” This is mere assertion, without the shadow of proof. I affirm that it exactly corresponds with the object the Apostle had in view. We are told “(Greek word) may be rendered all had died” Well, let (Greek word) be rendered if one had died, and I have no other objection to the rendering, than that it is going out of the way to procure a worse translation; the sense is the same.

P. 221. —Referring to the general expressions, “the world,” and “all men,” we are told, that the mode adopted to restrict them “would equally explain and equally justify the assertions, that God elected the world, and that he justifies all men. Yet it is very observable, that no language at all approximating to this, is to be found in the New Testament.” In reply, I refer to that passage in the Old Testament, that all the families of the earth should be blessed in Abraham. I refer to 1 Cor. xv. 22. “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” This does not treat of the resurrection of the just and unjust; for, 1st, Nothing is said in this chapter of the resurrection of the wicked. 2dly, The wicked are never said to be “made alive.” And, 3dly, The expression is explained in the succeeding verse. “But every man in his own order: Christ the first-fruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his" coming.” Here the expression all shall be made alive, is explained by those that are Christs. Again in Rom. v. 15, we read of the many being dead, and “the grace of God and the gift by grace having abounded to the many, ver. 18. Judgement came upon all men to condemnation, and the free gift came upon all men to justification, ver. 19. The many were made sinners and the many shall be made righteous. In fact, as I have observed, the plea of universal salvation may be more plausibly urged from this passage, than that of universal Atonement from the passages usually quoted in defence of the system.

What does Dr Payne think of the Apostle’s assertion, that the Gospel is come unto all the world, Col. i. 6, is preached to every creature under heaven, Col. i. 23, and of the Apostle teaching every man that he may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus, ver. 22. These and many other expressions must be limited, precisely as the expressions respecting the Atonement, in order to maintain the harmony of the Word of God.

P. 223. —We are told, “Calvin taught that all men may be saved on their faith and repentance.” Yes, but Calvin knew that both faith and repentance are the gift of God. Dr Wardlaw indeed tells us, that Christ being exalted to give repentance, means his giving the means of repentance. This corresponds with the following passage of Bishop Tomline, quoted, with disapprobation, by Dr Payne, p. 58.[*************]  “Those who are blessed with the glorious light of the Gospel, according to the scheme of Divine Providence, may be said to be predestinated to life, because they enjoy the means of salvation.” “Those whom God hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, are that part of mankind to whom God has decreed to make known the Gospel; and consequently, to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, does not mean actually saving them, but granting them the means of salvation through Jesus Christ.” Here we may observe that the bishop, however erroneous, does not attempt, like Dr Payne, to get rid of the difficulty of the Gospel having only reached a small part of mankind by laying the blame on the Church; he traces it to its true source, Divine Providence. The Church has been much to blame; but in regard to the spread of the Gospel, it has done “what God’s hand and his counsel determined before to be done,” Acts iv. 28. And the limited diffusion of the Gospel remains an irrefragable proof that Christ laid down his life for his sheep, who shall all hear his voice, and shall, without exception, enjoy eternal life. The ransom was too costly to fail of its accomplishment; God “purchased the Church with his own blood;” Christ loved the Church, and gave himself for it, Eph. v. 25.

Neither the bishop nor Dr Wardlaw, however, teach the Scripture doctrine either of predestination or of repentance. The Scripture tells us, that Christ not only bestows the means, but the blessing of repentance; and how is this accomplished? Repentance is beautifully described by the prophets. “I have surely heard Ephraim bemoaning himself thus: Thou hast chastised me, and I was chastised, as a bullock unaccustomed to the yoke: Turn thou me, and I shall be turned; for Thou art the Lord my God. Surely after that I was turned, I repented; and after that I was instructed, I smote upon my thigh: I was ashamed, yea, even confounded, because I did bear the reproach of my youth,” Jer. xxxi. 18, 19. “And I will establish my covenant with thee; and thou shalt know that I am the Lord: That thou mayest remember, and be confounded, and never open thy mouth anymore because of thy shame, when I am pacified toward thee for all that thou hast done, saith the Lord God,” Ezek. xvi. 62, 63. Thus Christ gives his people repentance by manifesting himself to them as he doth not to the world. He gives them knowledge of salvation by the remission of their sins, Luke i. 77, and thus melts their hard hearts.

The Apostle says, the servant of the Lord must not strive, but in meekness instruct those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth, 2 Tim. ii. 25. The Apostle is not here speaking of the means, but of the grace of repentance. The persons referred to already possessed the means.

Who ever said the Atonement was not, in itself, sufficient to secure the salvation of all mankind? I have expressly stated, that had it been God’s purpose to save all mankind by the blood of the cross, no further suffering, on the part of the Surety of the new covenant, would have been required. After admitting that it was not God’s “intention” to save all by the Atonement, our author gets rid of no difficulty. The children of God are created anew, and this must be the act of the Creator.[†††††††††††††] The simple question is, For whom did Christ undertake? The Scripture says, for his brethren the seed of the woman, as distinguished from the seed of the serpent. Their knowledge of him is ascribed to his having known them, Gal. iv. 9. Phil. iii. 12. He says of them, “They shall hear my voice,” which is lifted up in the hearing of many whom he never knew, and who, consequently, despise all his counsel, and will have none of his reproof. They are verily guilty; their blood is upon their own head; their rejection of the Gospel proceeds from love of darkness and hatred of the light, and, in their doom, the elect, for whose good all things work together, see the boundless riches of that grace which alone made them to differ. At the same time, we learn, that the rejection of Christ was not requisite for the condemnation of fallen man, for millions never hear the joyful sound. The proportion of those favoured with the Gospel is comparatively small, and thus, by many not being called, we have an illustration of the fact, that the little flock of Christ are chosen from the many who are called. The rejection of the Gospel by multitudes, is the proof of their uncancelled guilt, of their being under the curse; of the wrath of God abiding on them. We read of a prophet saying to the king of Israel, “I know that God hath determined to destroy thee, because thou hast done this, and hast not hearkened unto my counsel.” So, if the Gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost.

P. 233. — “To justify an individual when God is the justifier,” says our author, “is not then to pronounce him innocent, or righteous, since no men are really so; nor by any conceivable process whatever, can they be made actually so; but it is either to count him righteous, that is, to treat him “as if he were righteous, or, to declare that the Divine government will so treat him.” Does God then justify the wicked? A man must either be righteous or guilty; and the government which does not treat him according to his real character is not a just government. The Gospel is the revelation of God’s righteousness; that everlasting righteousness brought in by Christ, the second Adam, in which all the seed of Abraham shall be justified, and shall glory. In the first Adam, all his posterity were made sinners, and, consequently, condemned. The children of the second Adam are all made righteous, and, consequently, justified. All sinned in Adam's sin; the seed of the woman are all justified in Christ's righteousness. Dr Payne may ask, “How can these things be?” I reply, so they are; the word of God plainly asserts it, —the utter depravity of mankind, who go astray from the womb, speaking lies, and in whom dwelleth no good thing; together with the sufferings and death of infants, demonstrate that such is the case.

If to justify be merely to treat a person as if he were righteous, how comes the Apostle to say, “Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect?” There is no condemnation for a pardoned criminal, but he cannot allege that nothing can be laid to his charge. The believer is “complete in Christ,” Col. ii. 10. He is forever perfected, Heb. x. 14. In him “the righteousness of the law is fulfilled,” Rom. viii. 4. Christ bore his sin, was made sin for him, and he is made the righteousness of God in Him. This is the “process” by which the sinner is made righteous. Our author stumbles at this statement; he cannot conceive how it can be: it is beyond his philosophy. But has he never read that it was the purpose of God to stain the pride of all human glory; and that the price of wisdom is to become a fool.

P. 284. — He quotes Mr. Fuller, who says, “justification is our standing acquitted by the revealed will of God, declared in the Gospel. As the wrath of God is revealed from heaven in the curses of the law; so the righteousness of God is revealed” — “in the declarations of the Gospel. It is in the revelation of God, in His Word, that the sentence both of condemnation and justification consists. He whom the Scriptures bless is blessed; and he whom they curse is cursed.” Is the sentence in the revealed will of God a dead letter? and will it not be carried into execution? Most certainly he whom the Scriptures bless is blessed; and he whom they curse is cursed. The former shall inherit the blessing, and the latter endure the curse. Again, is not the sentence both of condemnation and justification according to truth and justice? Are any, excepting the guilty, condemned? Are any, excepting the righteous, justified “in the revelation of the mind of God in his word?” Certainly God never accounts anyone what he is not in reality, for He is the God of truth.[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡]

P. 235. —Our author objects to the definition of justification in the Assembly’s Catechism, of which, by the way, he does not give a correct account, for it does not describe the “justified man,” as being “set free from the punishment due to his sins, and that he is treated as if he were a righteous man.” The simple-minded men who drew up the Catechism supposed, that when God pardoneth all the sins of believers, “accepteth and. accounteth their persons righteous in his sight,” they were truly righteous, because He judgeth righteous judgement. But, according to Dr Payne, justification is not “an ACT of God,” because this would “force upon us the inquiries, —When did this act take place? In time or in eternity? Where did it take place? In heaven or on earth?” I reply, like every other act of God, it was in His eternal purpose; and, like the act of creation, was carried out in time. We may as well talk of eternal resurrection, as of eternal justification., Both were hid in God; both were equally certain. According to God’s eternal purpose, Christ died in the fulness of time for the sins of his people, and was raised for their justification. His resurrection was the justification of his body the Church; but the members of this body are known only to him; they are manifested in their successive generations, by God giving them repentance to the acknowledgement of the truth, 2 Tim. ii. 25. Their relation to the Shepherd is proved by their hearing his voice; by his taking up his abode in them, and dwelling in their hearts by faith. They are, therefore, described as being justified by faith; just as the lame and the blind were healed by faith in the days of Christ’s flesh. They were healed by his power, but this power was exerted through faith; in other words, on those who believed.

P. 281. — “All men,” we are told, “have an interest in the Atonement, which is not granted to fallen angels; inasmuch as the latter could not be saved if they would — the former might be so.” But what if none will, unless they are made willing in the day of his power? “What interest have those in the Atonement who sin and perish without law, and never hear of the Atonement?” This class, for six thousand years, has comprised the far greater part of mankind. “He showeth his word unto Jacob; His statutes and his judgements unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation.” Psal. cxlvii. 19, 20.

I have, in the preceding pages, treated of the union between Christ and his people, and shall only observe, that upon this union hangs the whole scheme of salvation. Our author may speculate upon Adam and Christ being “rather moral than legal or natural heads,” p. 317; but, according to the word of God, they, and their respective families, are so closely united, or rather, identified, that the guilt of Adam, and the righteousness of Christ, are the guilt and righteousness of their respective children. Hence all the children of Adam are by nature children of wrath, shapen in iniquity, and conceived in sin; and all Christ's children can challenge the universe to lay anything to their charge.

Our author, referring to my late brother’s Exposition of the Epistle to the Romans, says, p. 314. “he seems to hint at the existence of a union {between Christ and his people) which is mysterious and incomprehensible in its nature.” Dr Payne supposes that Jonathan Edwards, and others, would agree with this view, while he thinks such notions “are repugnant to that distinct agency which enters into our notions of accountableness;”[§§§§§§§§§§§§§] and concludes by intimating his disapprobation of throwing “unnecessary mystery around the subject to which it refers.” On this I observe, 1st, That the whole controversy respecting the extent of the Atonement proceeds from a vain attempt to remove difficulties, in regard to man’s accountableness, which our faculties are utterly inadequate to reconcile with the sovereignty of God. To be consistent, we must either be satisfied on the subject upon God's authority while we confess it is too high for us, or choose one or the other part of the alternative; maintaining the accountableness, and denying the sovereignty, or vice versa. 2nd, I have as little inclination to throw “unnecessary mystery” around this or any other subject, as our author; but I would caution him against endeavouring to get rid of mystery in treating of the scheme of redemption, which is eminently “the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom —which none of the princes of this world knew.” He is aware into what errors attempts to get rid of mystery have led many writers; and, in regard to the subject in hand, the union of Christ and his people, the Apostle teaches as that it is “A GREAT MYSTERY,” shadowed forth by Eve being formed of Adam’s flesh and bones. “We are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones; for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the church.” Eph. v. 30-32.

P. 320. — “God has accordingly declared, in infinite grace to man, that He will save all that believe.” And has He not declared, with equal plainness, that faith is his gift, and that ”where there is no vision (as is the case with by far the greater part of the world) the people perish? Yet will he be justified in his sayings, and overcome when he is judged.”

P. 306. — Our author says, “We maintain that the death of Christ was a real satisfaction for sin,” and yet denies that it is restricted to those whose guilt it cancels. Does it then expiate all sin, or some sin? I judge of the extent of the Atonement both from its effects and from the declarations of the Word of God. I hold it as an axiom, that guilt alone prevents the love of God flowing to any of his intelligent creatures. In consequence of the guilt of God’s people having been expiated on Calvary, they are, in due time, made partakers of faith and every other grace. God’s love to them is manifested through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth. The Gospel is to them the power of God unto salvation, the savour of life unto life; to others, it is an aggravation of their condemnation, placing then- alienation from God in the strongest point of view. To them it is the savour of death unto death. Men, in general, do not hear the Gospel at all, and of those who hear it, the far greater part reject it. Hence the Lord, tracing his people's salvation to the Atonement, says, “I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.” “And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd,” John x. 16. They are his “purchased possession, bought with a price,” redeemed from their vain conversation with the precious blood of Christ, 1 Pet. i. 18. In all this I find the most entire harmony, and therefore, I most confidently repeat, “when a real Atonement, expiation, or satisfaction for sin is admitted, it must of necessity be restricted to those whose guilt it cancels.” When, on the other hand, the Saviour’s sufferings and death are viewed as “that which shall preserve to the moral government of God that powerful control over its subjects which the entrance of sin endangered, and which its unconditional forgiveness would have entirely destroyed,”[**************] there must of course be a virtual denial of the substitution of Christ for his people.

P. 398. — Our author dwells upon my agreement with Dr Marshall, that Christ’s sufferings were “the very punishment, —the idem not the tantundem merely.” Now, I have clearly stated, that Christ, as the substitute of his people, having, by taking part with them in flesh and blood, brought them into the closest union with himself, Heb. ii. 11, —endured the curse of the law, —separation from God, —and that this was announced on the cross by the cry, “My God, my God! why hast Thou forsaken me?”—the Lord made to meet upon him the iniquities of them all. For their sakes, He sanctified himself, thus securing their being, in their successive generations, sanctified through the truth, John xvii. 19. Thus was the law magnified and made honourable, by the obedience, unto death, of an infinitely glorious Victim, in whose wonderful person the complete union of God and a countless multitude of fallen men was exhibited, and a more awful manifestation of the inflexible justice and inviolable truth of God was given, than if the whole race of Adam had perished, as did the fallen angels. I still confidently hold, that what our Lord suffered, was the very penalty due to us in law, viz., being cut off from God, the Fountain of holiness and happiness.

The Scripture teaches us that the curse of God is the punishment of the breach of the law. Now, in the Scriptures, we are informed, that Christ hath redeemed his people from the curse of the law being made a curse for them: consequently, he endured the punishment which was due to their sins. Adam, in his original state, had to obey the law merely in its precept; but it was incumbent on the second Adam to obey not only the precept, but to endure the penalty. This was what no creature, however exalted, could have done. Being cut off from God, from whom alone it can derive life and strength, it could not possibly have done anything acceptable to God by which others might be delivered. But the Son of God was manifested to destroy the works of the devil.

From his birth, to his death Christ’s life was an atonement, a satisfaction for his people’s sins. He delighted in the law of God; it was within his heart; his meat and drink was to do his Father’s will. The assumption of human nature was an acknowledgement of the debt which he owed for those whom his Father had given him. His appearing in the form of a servant, in the likeness of sinful flesh, and consequently being a man of sorrows, proved that their sins were laid upon him; for holiness and happiness, sin and suffering, arc, under the righteous government of God, inseparable. In his humiliation, pains, and sorrows, there was a continual proof of his having been made sin. The penalty, which, as his people’s substitute he had to endure, began at his birth, and was consummated at his death, which was eminently the hour and power of darkness. It was the crisis of his sufferings, but at no period of his life upon earth did the cup pass from him. Hence he says, “I am afflicted and ready to die from my youth up: while I suffer thy terrors I am distracted,” Ps. lxxxviii. 15.

Had not the curse of God been upon the Redeemer from the moment of his incarnation, he must have been always happy while upon earth; but he was a man of sorrows and acquainted with griefs; there never was sorrow like unto his sorrow, wherewith the Lord afflicted him in the day of his fierce anger. He had indeed one consolation, and but one; he knew he was doing his Father’s will, and was the object of his supreme delight, even for the sufferings which he was enduring, and he looked through all the clouds and darkness with which he was surrounded to the joy set before him; to the day of his espousals, when his Wife should have made herself ready, and when he should present her to his Father spotless and blameless; when he should set her upon his glorious high throne, and thus produce a louder note of praise to God from the principalities and powers in heavenly places, by the consummation of His eternal purpose.

This supported his mind while he remained a homeless wanderer in this evil world. Such were the awful consequences of His being made sin, who knew no sin; in this consisted his abasement. He shall appear the second time without sin, in a way befitting his dignity as the Son of God, the Judge of the quick and the dead.

It was not necessary that Christ should have descended unto hell, considered as a place. Wherever the sentence of the broken law is executed, there is hell; in the garden and on the cross the great Surety endured the weight of God's wrath; and then more especially, he experienced the curse in all its bitterness.

We have observed that the penalty of disobedience was being cut off from God. This implies eternity of punishment, because no creature cut off from God can ever have power to return; and God's unspotted purity, justice, and immutability, forbid the repealing of the righteous sentence, or the communication of his grace to a sinful creature without an atonement. The eternity of punishment arises from the creature's weakness; it cannot suffer all the punishment due to transgression. But Christ being both God and man, could do what no creature could; his dignity gave infinite value to his sufferings, and thus justice is fully satisfied.

It does not become us to pry too curiously into the Divine dispensations; our high imaginations must be cast down, and with the disposition of little children we must sit at the feet of the great Teacher, be satisfied with what he is pleased to communicate, and look forward to the period when we shall no longer see through a glass darkly, but face to face, when we shall not know in part, but shall know even as we are known.

P. 399. — As to what our Author says of Christ suffering, “remorse and despair,” it is utterly irrelevant. It has been already stated that in all his affliction, and while enduring the curse of the law, the Redeemer knew that he was yielding implicit obedience to his Father’s commandments. He knew, moreover, that he should prevail in the awful contest upon which he had entered; he knew he should not be ashamed. There was therefore no reason for remorse or despair, notwithstanding his enduring the curse of the law, the very punishment due to his people’s transgression; everything he did was an act of obedience to his Father, who once and again testified his approbation of his conduct.

In order, however, to teach us that the sins of his people were actually laid upon him, we find many passages in the Psalms, where he is described as humbled in the dust on account of sin; and this renders that part of Scripture most valuable and applicable to us, who have drunk up iniquity as the ox drinketh up water. This forms a connecting link between Him who was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners, and us, who are shapen in iniquity, and conceived in sin. Had not this been the case, there would have been no correspondence between his experience while on earth, and that of his followers.

Ib. — In speaking of the Atonement, I desire habitually to remember that it is essentially necessary to receive the kingdom of God as a little child. Many questions may be asked, and consequences deduced, which may be too high for us. Dr Payne not only speaks of Christ suffering remorse and despair, but of his continuing to endure them “forever, —for they are involved in the threatening denounced against us.” But might not the sword awaking against the Man the fellow of the Almighty, and smiting the Shepherd, —might not this, from its infinite value, preclude the necessity of the continuance of sufferings under which a creature must have forever lain?

Ib. — Who denies that the sufferings of Christ were “substitutionary sufferings!” They were endured by the Substitute of his people, the Surety of the new covenant. This covenant is called the everlasting covenant, Heb. xiii. 20, because it originated in the counsels of eternity, and extends to the consummation of all things, nay, to a future eternity.

P. 404. —Our author quotes with approbation from Bishop Stillingfleet, that if Christ “had paid the very same, as the law required, when he suffered for sinners, — “there must have followed deliverance ipso facto of all for whom it was paid, —whereas, we observe, in the New Testament, that faith and repentance, and their consequents, are made necessary conditions on our part, to our actually partaking of the benefits that result from the Saviour's obedience and death.” Now, to say the least, this is a very inaccurate way of speaking. “Faith, repentance, and their consequents,” be they what they may, were unalterably secured for those for whom the Atonement was made. The resurrection of the head was the justification of the members, whose deliverance followed ipso facto; some of them might die in infancy, others become grey-headed, but from the period of their being given to the Saviour, their life was hid with Christ in God. Faith and repentance are the conditions of salvation, as breathing and eating are the conditions of the continuance of our natural life, or as the opening of our eyes is the condition of our seeing; but when God imparts to us natural life, he imparts a disposition, nay, the necessity of breathing, eating, and opening our eyes; and when the Redeemer bore the sins of his people in his own body on the tree, he secured for them the communication of the Spirit, as surely as God secured the breath of life to the posterity of Adam and Eve, when He said, Increase and multiply.

The work of Christ is one; its several parts may be distinguished, but cannot be separated. The Atonement, the intercession, and the final blessing are component parts of the same wonderful plan, just as the duty of the high priest in Israel, on the great day of atonement, was one continued action. He first offered the sacrifice, then burnt incense, and afterwards blessed the people. So Christ, having offered the great sacrifice, entered heaven with his own blood to make intercession for those whose sins he had borne. The fruit of this intercession is their receiving repentance unto life; and he will at last appear to bless them, and receive them to himself. These are inseparable links of the same chain. Dr Payne must admit, that Christ disclaims making intercession for any excepting his people; he will bless none other, and it would be passing strange if the sacrifice which is the only remaining part of the priestly office, were offered for those for whom he does not intercede, and whom he does not bless, because, as he tells them, he never knew them.

That Church which he purchased with his own blood, Christ calls, and justifies, and glorifies. God does not impute their trespasses to the world which he was in Christ reconciling to himself. This reconciliation was not the removal of their enmity against God, but of his most righteous displeasure against them, thus preparing them to be a habitation of God through the Spirit. We read of reconciling the holy places, which consisted in figuratively removing their uncleanness, by the shedding of blood, and thus rendering them a suitable dwelling-place for Him who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity. The reconciliation produced no change on inanimate matter.

P. 405. — Dr Payne is dissatisfied with my describing the controversy with Dr Wardlaw, as respecting particular redemption. He had before quoted Mr. Scott, who uses the same term in the sense in which I employed it. And what is still more surprising, he tells us, two or three pages afterwards, that, with certain limitations, he “should not much object to the use of the term,” p. 409. But, still, with the greatest softness and self-complacency, he says, “I confess I find it difficult to reconcile this with Christian candour and integrity;” and in the next page, he seems in no small degree of losing his equanimity, when he talks of “such insufferable assumption.” I have not the least objection to gratify Dr Payne by using the word Atonement instead of redemption, although it appears self-evident that when an Atonement is provided, if it be sufficient, it must remove guilt, and accomplish the redemption of those for whom it is made; and I must still maintain that those who do not admit this, abandon the doctrine of Atonement altogether. Atonement and reconciliation are synonymous; if the Atonement do not produce reconciliation in the offended party, provided his wisdom and goodness be infinite, the reason must be that the Atonement is inadequate.

P: 406. —Our author “deeply” regrets my not having answered Dr Wardlaw’s question, Whether the elect are not described as being “previously to the grace of God applying the Atonement,” “children of wrath even as others?” I answer distinctly, by “the single monosyllable,” No! They are described as the objects of God’s “everlasting love” “vessels of mercy which he had afore prepared unto glory,” “chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, that they should be holy and without blame before him in love.” True, they were BY NATURE the children of wrath even as others. Considered in Adam they were under the curse; while their salvation through the blood of Christ shed, or to be shed for them on Calvary, was sure as the throne of God. I do not know whether this may be satisfactory to Dr Payne. At all events, it is not more explicit than what I said before. Dr Wardlaw’s question never was one in which I felt the smallest difficulty.

I now add, Christ appeared as the Representative of his people, the Head of the new covenant; he is the propitiatory, shadowed forth by the mercy seat —the throne of the God of Israel, —by which the tables of the law which had been once broken, but restored, —were covered. When Christ rose from the dead, his people were representatively justified by the resurrection of their Head, and their final salvation was secured. This does not prevent the necessity of their being made meet for the inheritance of the saints in light,, by the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost, which with all other spiritual and heavenly blessings are secured to them by the Saviour’s exaltation. In the sight of men they appear in their unconverted state, busily treasuring up for themselves wrath against the day of wrath; but the Lord knoweth them that are his, and in the way and at the time most conducive to his own glory and their everlasting good, they shall depart from iniquity, and be graffed into the good olive tree; the certain consequence of which is their bringing forth fruit to the praise of redeeming love. Men may pervert this doctrine, but it is at their peril; it affords no ground for presumption, for no one can know his election but by being called into the fellowship of God s dear Son.

It never entered my mind that men are in a state of salvation previously to faith in Jesus, but faith, and every other spiritual blessing are secured by the Atonement made for God’s people upon Calvary, before many of them were born; just as their sinful nature was the necessary consequence of Adam’s fall, which took place before they had a being.

P. 407. — I said, if men are saved not by the Atonement itself, but by its application, it follows, that the “Holy Spirit, not Christ, is the Saviour.” Against this, which appears to me almost an identical proposition, Dr Payne lodges his strongest protest, which he endeavours to vindicate by the supposition of an event which he admits “cannot possibly happen,” (viz. an elect man dying before his conversion to God,) which therefore, I consider myself fully entitled to pass over in silence. The means as well as the end are included in the Divine decree. When the elect were given to the Son, repentance unto life, and the bestowment of all those graces which adorn the Christian character, were irrevocably secured to them. The death of Christ did something more than lay a basis for the deliverance of his people, it “redeemed” them “from the curse of the law,” and secured for them the heavenly inheritance, of which neither earth nor hell shall deprive them. This inheritance is bestowed not only on the Jews but on the Gentiles also, although it was not till after the resurrection that the word of salvation was sent to them. Gal. iii. 12—14.[††††††††††††††]

If the death of Christ only laid a basis for the deliverance of his people, it is obvious that the deliverance itself is effected by the Holy Spirit, so that He, and not Christ, is the deliverer. Two governments engaged in war, resolve to make peace; they agree upon the basis uti possidetis; plenipotentiaries are appointed; and a treaty is concluded. In this case surely the plenipotentiaries are the negotiators. They conclude the treaty, although the basis was previously fixed. In like manner, although the death of Christ is admitted to be the basis of salvation, if sinners are saved, not by the Atonement, but by its application, the Spirit, who applies it, is undoubtedly the Saviour.

A child succeeds to an estate bequeathed to him, but “the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; but is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father,“ Gal. iv. 1, 2. Still he is the heir; his title is as valid as when he assumes the entire management. And thus it is with those for whose sake Christ sanctified himself; they are redeemed with the blood of Christ, and their calling, their justification, and glorification, are subject to no possible contingency. In their natural state they do not differ from those whom Christ never knew, yet are they heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ. The price of their redemption has been paid, and in due time their deliverance shall be accomplished. When Archimedes said, if he had a fulcrum for his lever, he would move the earth; he did not mean that this was to be done by the fulcrum. It was merely the basis on which the moving power was to rest. It is self-evident, then, if the Atonement merely “laid a basis for their” (the elect’s) “deliverance,” which is accomplished by the Holy Spirit, HE and not CHRIST, is their deliverer.

In floating a raft of timber down the Rhine, a man fell into the water. His companion ran and caught him when sinking. Can there be a question, by whom he was saved? The raft was the basis which supported his deliverer, but no one would say he was saved by the raft.

The Apostle describes believers as having died and risen with Christ, Col. ii. 12, as being blessed with all spiritual blessings, in heavenly places in Christ, Eph. i. 3, as raised up together, and made to sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, Eph. ii. 6.[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡]

The presence of the Head of the body in heaven is the pledge that all the members—the children with whom he took part in flesh and blood—shall assuredly follow. During their unconverted state, they are hidden from men, but they are known to God. It may be said that those who are dead and risen with Christ, who are quickened together with him, and made to sit together in heavenly places, are believers; but the whole body died in Christ, the Head; in him they were quickened, and are represented as now seated with him in heavenly places. Hence believers are exhorted to reckon themselves to be dead indeed unto sin, and alive unto God, through Jesus Christ our Lord, not that they feel no disposition to indulge in sin, but that in Christ, their glorious Head, they died and rose again. The Apostle, after speaking of the Colossian believers, as having been buried and risen with Christ, proceeds: —41 If ye then be risen with Christ,” &c. chap. iii. 1. Certainly their resurrection was coeval with the Lord’s; the members rose with their Head, although they cannot be distinguished till called by grace.

P. 408. — Our author complains of my identifying Atonement and redemption. They are inseparable; the one includes the other; if the stipulated ransom be paid, and if he who has paid it be unchangeable, and possess sufficient power, the deliverance of the captive is beyond the possibility of a doubt. Believers are said to wait for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of their body, Rom. viii. 23. Yet are they now “the sons of God,” adopted into his family. The adoption for which they wait is their entrance upon their glorified state. Till they believe, sinners do not experience the effects of the Atonement made for them; but they shall do so as surely as the saints, who, at present, dwell in houses of clay, shall be raised in bodies fashioned like to Christ’s glorified body.

P. 409 — With regard to the door of mercy being “set open to all men by the death of Christ,” I would observe, it is no more set open to all by the Gospel than by the law. “The man that doeth these things shall live in them,” and “he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved,” but by the deeds of the law no flesh shall be justified in his sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin; and all have sinned. Neither would salvation by the Gospel have been possible for fallen man, had not the covenant transactions of the Father and the Son, and the consequent endurance of the penalty by the members of Christ’s body in their Head, secured the salvation of a multitude which no man shall be able to number. Like their brethren of men, they were dead, but their life is hid with Christ in God; “thine they were,” says the Saviour, “and thou gavest them me.” He rendered himself responsible for them, and declares that they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of his hand, John x. 28. He makes them willing in the day of his power. A man can no more of himself believe the Gospel than he can obey the law. In both cases the inability is moral, but not on that account the less real and absolute. Dr Payne may ask what do you make of human responsibility? I reply, I hold it as strongly as he can do. It is written as with a sunbeam in every page of the Word of God, and I am as little disposed as our author to resist consciousness.

P. 411. — Dr Payne has a long note upon justice, in which I have no personal concern, as he confines himself to combating Dr Marshall’s views. Justice, as Dr Wardlaw properly observes, consists in rendering to all their due; although he afterwards nullifies the statement by his baseless theory of the different kinds of justice, public, distributive, &c. Our author sets aside both the justice and truth of God, telling us that the infliction of the threatening “is not imperatively necessary, unless the public good require it.” This is precisely Dr Wardlaw’s “public justice,” on which I have said enough in the preceding pages. Dr Bates well observes that “it was an act of justice to inflict the punishment when Christ had undertaken for us.”[§§§§§§§§§§§§§§]

According to our author, if the sinner has his due, “no mercy can be extended to any transgressor.” But the manifold wisdom of God in the Gospel consists in the Son of God having so identified himself with his people that in him they endured the curse, and in him they inherit the blessing. In respect of both they drink of his cup. He was a man of sorrows, he went by the cross to the crown; and they through much tribulation enter the kingdom of God. They have fellowship with him in his death, that they may also have fellowship with him in his resurrection. They suffer with him, and shall reign with him. They are filling up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in their flesh, for his body’s sake, which is the Church, Col. i. 24.

The Scripture reveals God as a just God and a Saviour; just, and the justifier of the ungodly. There is a breadth, and length, and depth, and height in this wisdom which we cannot fathom. We may not be able to explain how it comported with perfect justice, that all should die by the disobedience of Adam, but we are taught to receive it on the divine authority; and, in perfect harmony and conformity with this, an innumerable multitude are made alive in Christ. This can only be received when our high imaginations are cast down, when we cease from our own wisdom, and are contented to receive the kingdom of God as a little child.

Our author, instead of appealing to the Scriptures, refers to many “writers on ethical subjects,” and affirms that justice is not a distinct or separate attribute. “It may, perhaps, be said to be holiness or rectitude, in act or operation in a moral system.” P. 414. — He then goes into a long metaphysical disquisition, in which he tells us “Law emanates from God, not as a person or being, but as a moral governor.” P. 416. — That “it is pre-eminently important to observe that the necessity of punishment grows out, not of the personal, but the official character and relation of God.” Ib.— “If the great God were not our moral governor, he could possess no more right or power to punish men than one man has to punish another.” Ib. —He affirms that essential justice cannot admit of a substitute. But the Scripture teaches us that the redeemed died in Christ, and thus endured the penalty, and that the Gospel is the revelation of God’s righteousness or justice. “God set forth his Son to be a propitiation through faith in his blood,[***************] to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; to declare I say at this time his righteousness, that he might be just and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.” Rom. iii. 25, 26.

P. 419. —We are told the Atonement does not save per se. True, it does not preclude regeneration, but it renders it certain. It turns away God's anger from those for whom it was offered, and secures their salvation. The sheep for whom Christ laid down his life shall hear his voice; they must be brought into his fold, John x. 15, 16. In that blessed company, who have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb, there will be many little children saved by the Atonement; and if it does not save them per se, I know not how they are saved. Doubtless they are regenerated, but this is the necessary consequence of the expiation offered for them. They were shapen in iniquity and conceived in sin, were by nature children of wrath, but “the handwriting of ordinances which was against them,” —as well as adults, — “which was contrary to them, he took out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” Such language could not have been employed if the Atonement had been universal. In that case, the law was taken out of the way, and nailed to the cross in behalf of all mankind. All would therefore be dead to the law by the body of Christ, and consequently married to another, even to him that is raised from the dead, that they might bring forth fruit unto God, Rom. vii. 4.

Those who die in infancy, as well as adults, are “justified by his blood,” and MUCH MORE SHALL BE SAVED FROM WRATH THROUGH HIM, Rom. v. 9. And here, I may observe that Dr Payne has taken no notice of this, and many other passages of God’s word, to which I referred in proof of the particularity of the Atonement; he prefers metaphysical reasoning. A gentleman, with whom I travelled in a mail coach, many years ago, told me he had a law-suit in which Mr. Erskine (afterwards Lord Chancellor) was his counsel. The client possessed a document which, as he said, completely established his claim; but his counsel neglected bringing this forward, and trusted to a very eloquent address to the jury; in consequence of which he lost a large sum of money.

In Dr Payne’s future lucubrations on the Atonement, I would earnestly recommend to him to trust more to the Scriptures, and less to his metaphysics. He says the single question (respecting the satisfaction made upon the cross,) is, “What are the dicta of reason and Scripture?” p. 417. Let me entreat Dr Payne to trust less to his reason, and more to the Word of God, whose avowed purpose it is to stain the pride of all human glory, more especially men’s vain reasonings. God has made foolish the wisdom of this world, while by his Spirit he reveals to his people those things which the natural man receiveth not, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned, 1 Cor. ii.14.

The inconsistency of particular redemption (or, if Dr Payne likes it better, Atonement,) with the general invitations of the Gospel, seems, —perhaps with the exception of his metaphysics, —to be the main prop of our author's system. In the preceding pages I have considered this objection, and have shown that there is not the shadow of inconsistency in holding that the Atonement was made for the elect alone, and that they are separated from others by the general calls and invitations of the Gospel—which is therefore compared to a fan. The sheep of Christ for whom the good Shepherd laid down his life, hear his voice, while others disregard it. He received them from his Father in the everlasting council, he bore their curse, and is invested with unbounded power, that he may bring them to glory. They shall all again pass under the rod, and he will deliver them in full tale to his Father, saying, Behold I and the children whom thou hast given me. “Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost,” John xvii. 12. With regard to all others, he will say, I never knew you; but the Lord knoweth them that are his; hence they are made to know God, Gal. iv. 9; and by the grace treasured up in Christ for their benefit, they depart from iniquity; while others prove by their continued unbelief and disobedience, that they are still under the curse, and that the wrath of God abideth on them. They love the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds are evil. There is in them no good thing, consequently they reject the counsel of God against themselves, and perish in their sin.

There is one consideration to which I have repeatedly referred, which demonstrates the error of those who hold universal Atonement; and that is, the small part of the world which ever had an opportunity of hearing the Gospel, and many in the most favoured countries are, by their circumstances, nearly as much precluded from listening to the truth as those who inhabit countries where the Gospel never came. It is impossible to reconcile this palpable fact with universal Atonement; and I have shown in the preceding pages, that from the days of our first parents, God has continually exhibited, in his dealings with mankind, the two families into which he was pleased to divide them, when, in the curse on the serpent, he announced the coming of the Saviour. To this and various other proofs of particular Atonement, Dr Payne has attempted no reply, except by alleging that the Church is to blame.

The limited diffusion of the Gospel is in every respect inconsistent with Dr Payne’s system. Referring to his lectures on sovereignty, he informs us, “that in reference to those who are involved in the same general sentence of condemnation, and must stand at length at the judgement seat, equity does require that the moral governor should deal with all alike—that the door of mercy (if it be opened) should be set open to all,—that the Gospel should be preached to all, — that the same objective motives to receive it should be presented to all,[†††††††††††††††] —and that at the great day, when one man is saved through believing, and another lost through rejecting the Gospel, it must appear that the same substantial and radical inducements to receive it, had been presented to the latter individual as to the former,” p. 364. But in point of fact, the Gospel is preached to comparatively few. The door of mercy is not set open to all. Even those born where the Gospel is preached are placed in very different situations. Some have every external inducement to listen; others to disregard it; a still more numerous class never hear it at all, and the Scripture tells us, “where there is no vision, the people perish.” Where, then, is Dr Payne’s “equity” which requires “that the moral governor should deal with all alike.” He tells us elsewhere it is the fault of the Church that all have not heard the Gospel; but be the fault where it may, “the moral governor does” not “deal with all alike.” The Gospel is not “preached to all.”

It may be said the Gospel when first announced was adapted to mankind universally; but, in the course of events, many are precluded from hearing the Saviour’s name. They sin without law, and perish without law. This could not have been the case, had not mankind been condemned in Adam, and in this as in everything else, we know that the judgement of God is according to truth and justice.

In conclusion, I would observe, that Dr Payne reduces that most astonishing manifestation of the Divine wisdom — into which the angels desire to look —in which mercy and truth are met together, righteousness and peace have kissed each other, into a contrivance to uphold the honour of the government of God in the eyes of the universe. According to this supposition, He gave his only begotten Son to shame and ignominy, for the purpose of making an impression on his creatures; while guilt and innocence were confounded, and the spotless Lamb of God was bruised, that rebels might escape, notwithstanding their guilt, which by no “conceivable process” can be removed, p. 234.

According to the Word of God, He who knew no sin was made sin for his people, that they might be made the righteousness of God in him; He united, nay identified, himself with his brethren, that he might restore what he took not away, that he might raise them from the dust to sit with him upon his throne. He bore their sins; not merely, as Dr Payne teaches, the consequences, but the guilt of their transgressions. Both Drs Payne and Wardlaw tell us, a guilty creature can never become innocent, but the contrary is the mystery of the Gospel. An innumerable multitude of Adam’s race, who were made sinners by his disobedience, shall stand before an assembled universe in a robe of righteousness brighter than the robes of angels: theirs is the righteousness of God; and this is the subject of the Gospel.

The great object of the abettors of the new system, is to impress men deeply with a sense of their responsibility. This is, no doubt, very important, but the constitution of the human mind precludes the possibility of men, —whatever they may profess, —divesting themselves of the conviction that they are accountable. This at least is the general rule; there may be exceptions where men, in consequence of resisting their convictions, are “given up to strong delusion that they may believe a lie.” It appears very plausible, to allege, that if you inform ungodly men that faith is the gift of God, they will make use of the doctrine to excuse their indifference and disregard of the Gospel. But after all, it is only telling them they are lost; so entirely lost, that not only can they offer no atonement for their sins, but that such is the alienation of their hearts from God and from righteousness, that they cannot, without Divine influence, receive the Atonement which God has revealed in the Gospel, and that, consequently, they are shut up to cast themselves entirely and unreservedly on the mercy of God, through Christ, exclaiming, Lord save me, I perish. Is this statement according to truth? is it contained in the Word of God? Has God declared that such is the case? And shall we be wiser than HIM, and conceal what He has proclaimed; or shall we not, by manifestation of the truth, commend ourselves to every man’s conscience?

It will generally be found that those who are brought to the knowledge of the truth, are first convinced of their utter helplessness and inability to turn to God, which they feel to be essential to their escaping the wrath to come. Hence the distress so generally felt before receiving peace in Christ. We may, and ought to tell men, of the unlimited freeness of the invitations of the Gospel; not, however, attempting to conceal from them, that sinners obey the truth only through the Spirit, and, at the same time, encouraging them to look to Jesus for salvation, to bestow upon them the Holy Spirit, and to give them repentance unto life. If we are not greatly mistaken, much of the superficial profession of religion which we witness, originates in men substituting a profession, in which many of the great truths of the Gospel are included, in place of that powerful conviction which arises from a spiritual perception of the glory of the truth by which the current of the affections is changed. By a spiritual perception, we mean that view of spiritual and eternal things which no man can communicate to his neighbour, and which is only obtained by means of the anointing which teacheth us all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and by which we abide in him, 1 John ii. 27. “Depend upon it,” said an old and eminent Antiburgher minister, many years ago, “all false systems of doctrine agree on one point, the denial of a day of power.”

It is very remarkable how extensively, in certain classes, the profession of religion at present is diffused. Many exercise the “power” which they undoubtedly possess, of saying they believe, and this not with the view of deceiving others, for they are themselves deceived. They attach themselves to a favourite preacher, and they connect themselves with benevolent societies; are distinguished, it may be, for their activity in committees, while they are strangers to the plague of their own hearts, and to that change which is essential to our inheriting the kingdom of God. In every age, there have been many who had a form of godliness, while they denied its power; such characters were not unfrequent in the days of the Apostles, who preached the Gospel with the Holy Ghost sent down from Heaven, and, consequently, in its unadulterated purity. But this unavoidable evil is greatly increased when, in order to establish human responsibility, the absolute necessity of the teaching of the Spirit is, although not denied, kept out of view in addressing the Gospel to those who know not God.

Dr Payne appears to covet the title of a philosophical divine; it is a dangerous eminence. The man who aspires to it trespasses on forbidden ground. Stop, traveller! —is inscribed on the entrance gate. Paul, the ambassador of Jesus Christ, with all the authority of his apostolic character, and under the infallible guidance of inspiration, warns us of the danger of blending our philosophy with the doctrine of Jesus, Col. ii. 8. It is impossible to neglect the warning, without becoming the dupes of our own subtilties. In every age this has been the grand means of corrupting revelation, and it is now pervading even the disciples of Jesus in this country to a fearful extent. Popery, also, is making rapid strides, and the danger of its prevalence is greatly increased by so many having forsaken “the old paths,” and, instead of maintaining that sinners are made the righteousness of God in Christ, hold that, although still guilty, they are treated as if they were righteous. Not satisfied with the plain declarations of the Word of God, they endeavour to reconcile its doctrines with their preconceived notions. They quit the vantage ground afforded them by the paramount authority of the word of God, they come down into the plain; and if they are opposed by men more subtle and acute than themselves, they are sure to be entangled, and to bring reproach on the doctrine of Christ.

I give Dr Payne credit for wishing to maintain the Gospel in its purity; but the path which both Dr Wardlaw and he are pursuing, must inevitably lead to the denial of the necessity of the work of the Spirit to guide men into the truth. I do not suppose that either of them will give up this fundamental doctrine. I trust they have learned it from God; besides, their character, their writings, and their desire of appearing consistent, all forbid the supposition; but the young men, —under their tuition, listening to their prelections, hearing of man's power to believe the Gospel, which they are taught is the instrument of God’s moral government, —will infallibly, in many instances, be turned away from the wholesome words of sound doctrine. They may not deny the necessity of the Spirit’s power on the heart, but they will give it little prominence, and many of them will renounce it altogether. This has been verified in Scotland, by the schism, both among the Congregationalists and in the Secession. In both cases it was preceded by. the respective Professors countenancing the unscriptural dogma of universal Atonement.

The prospect in regard to vital religion, both in England and Scotland is very gloomy. In all denominations error and false doctrine are rife, and will probably increase to more ungodliness. There is also in many quarters a great degree of timidity which prevents a bold avowal of the truth, tending to stem the current; but the Lord will plead his own cause. He is conducting his Church in the right way to the glorious consummation which he had in view before the world was. And when the mystery of God shall be finished, the heavens shall declare his righteousness, his ways shall be fully vindicated, and glory in the highest shall redound to God, connected with an unfading crown of joy and righteousness, which shall be placed by the Lord the righteous Judge, on the head of all his blood bought sheep.

The End

Optical Character Recognition performed by Thomas M Witte.

[*] Scottish Presbyterian, Nov. 1843, p. 259.

[†] Jesus was eminently a man of sorrows, and this is the only occasion on which we read that he rejoiced.

[‡] Mosheim, conclusion of the “External History of the Church in the second century.” Vol. I. p. 156. Edinburgh, 1803.

[§] “Doctrine of the Christian Church in the second century.” Vol. I. p. 188,

[**] Not temples, as the passage is usually quoted. The Old Testament contains directions for the building of one, and but one temple, which was an emblem both of the natural and mystical body of Christ, John ii. 19, 21, Eph. ii. 20–22, 1 Pet. ii. 4, 5.

[††] The epithet in which its advocates rejoice, means moderate Calvinists, which being interpreted, is, modified Arminians.

[‡‡] The capitals are Dr. Wardlaw's.

[§§] Being dead to sin, does not imply having no inclination to sin, for there is a law in the members of every believer, inclining him to gratify the lusts of the flesh and of the mind. Christ died unto sin once. And as this means his having died a victim to sin, so believers being dead to sin, refers to their having died in Christ, their Head and Representative.

[***] R. Haldane's Exposition of the Epistle to the Romans, ch. iii. 21.

[†††] Of one family; the seed of the woman.

[‡‡‡] See also Eph. iv. 4, 25; 1 Cor. vi. 17; Col. iii. 15.

[§§§] It is also termed mysterious, because it was shadowed forth in the body prepared for Christ, which was one, although composed of many members.

[****] In this figure, we have a beautiful representation of the Church of Christ. A building is composed of many stones, but they are united into one, and mutually support each other, while they all rest upon the same foundation.

[††††] They “kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation,” Jude 6. God is the dwelling place of his creatures, Ps. xc. 1. When the angels cast off their allegiance, they left their own habitation, and are now houseless wanderers in creation.

[‡‡‡‡] This is not a personal but an official perfection.

[§§§§] This is Dr Payne's definition of making satisfaction for sin, which Dr Wardlaw eulogizes as his “accurate language,”-Wardlaw on the Atonement, p. 106.

[*****] Jenkyn on the extent of the Atonement; third Edition, p. 382.

[†††††] pp. 16, 17.

[‡‡‡‡‡] pp. 103 to 105.

[§§§§§] pp. 18, 19.

[******] A young minister preached his first sermon from the text, “Now, then, we are ambassadors for Christ,” &c. When he came down from the pulpit, an old man addressed him, “You forgot, sir, to show us your credentials. Paul not only described himself as an ambassador for Christ, but accompanied the declaration with the most satisfactory proof of his assertion.”-2 Cor. xii. 12.

[††††††] The capitals are Dr Wardlaw’s.

[‡‡‡‡‡‡] Dr Wardlaw admits that an Atonement for sin means an Atonement for sinners. What, then, becomes of his figment of the death of Christ being a satisfaction to public justice This is a pure chimera. It is our wisdom to adhere closely to the statements of the word of God, and not to be guided by our own reasonings.

[§§§§§§] The Gentiles had no concern in this transaction. True, it may be said, but the atonement in Israel was only typical. Of what was it typical, but of the propitiation to be made in the fulness of time for the true Israel gathered out of all nations? In other words, of all the families of the earth being blessed in the seed of Abraham.

[*******] That the world here means the redeemed of all nations, “the children of God who are scattered abroad,” is plain, for to them alone God does not impute their trespasses.

[†††††††] It is related of a prisoner, who was released on the celebrated 14th day of July 1789, from a dungeon in the Bastille, after a thirty years imprisonment, that he could not endure the liberty he had obtained. He sickened and died, lamenting his deliverance!

[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] What becomes of the millions of millions who never heard of pardoning mercy through Christ? Is salvation in their option or power? Yes, it may with equal truth be said, by keeping the law written on their hearts. -Rom. ii. 15.

[§§§§§§§] It is true, he proclaims salvation through obedience to the law; but the law is a schoolmaster to bring sinners to Christ, who is the end of the law. The promulgation of the law was inseparably connected with salvation through Christ.

[********] The Italics are the Doctor's.

[††††††††] The same species of JUSTICE is practised in China. If a Chinese happen to be killed, the government demands a person to be given up, who, although not guilty, is executed. This actually took place, some sixty years ago, at Canton.

[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] Edinburgh Review, (No. CLIX.) Extent of the Atonement, in its relation to God and the Universe, by the Rev. Thomas W. Jenkyn, D. D. President of Coward College, London, 1842; third edition, carefully revised. London: John Snow, 35 Paternoster Row.

[§§§§§§§§] A worshipper of the God of Israel.

[*********] This passage proves that the Lord wept over Jerusalem in contemplation of the miseries of the siege, and their subsequent temporal calamities. Thus far their doom was sealed; the things belonging to their peace as a nation, were now hid from their eyes. But so far from this being the case in regard to the salvation of their souls, they were to have far greater privileges than ever; salvation was to be preached to them through a crucified and risen Saviour, and thousands and ten thousands were to receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

[†††††††††] In a paper in the Primitive Church Magazine, upon the special operations of the Holy Spirit, quotations are made from Dr Jenkyn on the “Union of the Holy Spirit and the Church,” pp. 36, 107,63, 85, 478,479,483,485, affirming that God exerts no influence in conversion, but that “with which he has charged intellectual truth;” that the Holy Spirit is ever in the word; that he does not dwell in the soul of the believer; that he never acts by any immediate “impulse” or “operation.” That nothing is necessary to conversion but the putting a man in “a train of direct communication with the supply of the Spirit in the word;” and that to suppose he acts on the mind by a direct “impulse which overpowers all opposition, is an utter delusion.”—See Primitive Church Magazine for October 1844, p. 503. I have not seen the work referred to, but I have no doubt that Dr Jenkyn's system naturally tends to set aside the work of the Spirit in conversion. We have seen that Dr Wardlaw, while maintaining the necessity of the work of the Spirit, represents man as having power to believe.

[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] The knowledge here spoken of is confined to Christ's sheep, John x. 14, 27; Gal. iv. 9.

[§§§§§§§§§] Compare John x. 29.

[**********] Many are led into error in regard to the epithets holy and sanctified, employed in the New Testament, by confounding them with the same language frequently used in regard to Israel. The holiness of the latter was external, founded on their carnal relation to Christ, Rom. ix. 5. The true Israel are really holy in virtue of their spiritual relation to the Son of God, 1 Cor. vi. 17. Rom. viii. 9. Now the Apostle tells us it was meet for him to think of those whom he acknowledged as his Christian brethren, that they were all partakers of the grace which he had received, Phil. i. 7. The nation of Israel were Jews outwardly, believers are Jews inwardly, partakers of the circumcision of Christ, Col. ii. 11. Deut. xxx. 6.

[††††††††††] The expression their God is inaccurate and improper when applied to the “unreconciled.” God became the God of Israel exclusively by the Sinai covenant, according to his promise to Abraham: but, on account of their wickedness, he says, by his prophet, “Ye are not my people, and I will not be your God,” Hos. i. 9. When the Apostle says, “God is the God of the Gentiles,” he explains the expression as limited to believing Gentiles, Rom. iii. 29, 30. The Lord declares himself the God of the children of the new covenant, Jer. xxxi. 33, which cannot be broken. The children of Israel, in virtue of their carnal relation to Christ, were blessed with all carnal blessings in earthly places, Lev. xxvi. 1–13; believers, through their spiritual relation to Christ, 1 Cor. vi. 17, are blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places, Eph. i. 3.

[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] Dr Wardlaw justly observes, that the supplement you, 2 Cor. v. 20, in both its occurrences, should be men; “as though God did beseech men by us, we pray men, -in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.” The Corinthians, whom the Apostle was addressing, were already reconciled, having been called into the fellowship of God's son, Jesus Christ our Lord, 1 Cor. i. 9.

[§§§§§§§§§§] Had miraculous gifts continued in the churches till the present time, they also would have lost their power.

[***********] On the Atonement and Intercession of Jesus Christ; by the Rev. William Symmington, second edition, p. 29.

[†††††††††††] Referring to Isa. lvi. 10, where false teachers are described as dumb dogs, -greedy dogs.

[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] I fully coincide with our author in condemning the substitution of assent for faith; but after all that has been written upon the subject, I consider confidence in Christ to be the simplest definition of the faith of God’s elect. This is the alpha and omega of the Christian life, Heb. iii. 6–14.

[§§§§§§§§§§§] In reference to the epithet of ultra-Calvinists, I shall transcribe a paragraph from a letter of the late John Newton, who was never, I believe, suspected of Antinomianism by any who held the truth. He thus replies to the charge brought against him of being a “rigid Calvinist, which I presume nearly corresponds with Dr Payne's favourite term of an “ultra-Calvinist.” “If you mean by a rigid Calvinist, one who is fierce, dogmatical, and censorious, and ready to deal out anathemas against all who differ from him, I hope I am no more such a one than I am a rigid Papist. But as to the doctrines which are now stigmatized by the name of Calvinism, I cannot well avoid the epithet rigid, while I believe them: for there seems to be no medium between holding them, and not holding them; between ascribing salvation to the will of man, or the power of God; between grace and works, Rom. xi. 6; between being found in the righteousness of Christ, or in my own, Phil. iii. 9. Did the harsh consequences often charged upon the doctrine called Calvinistic, really belong to it, I should have much to answer for, if I had invented it myself, or taken it upon trust from Calvin; but as I find it in the Scriptures, I cheerfully embrace it, and leave it to the Lord to vindicate his own truth and his ways, from all the imputations which have been cast upon them.”— Newton's Posthumous Works, p. 248. London, 1808.

[************] Not that there is the slightest difficulty in reconciling the general proclamation of the Gospel with particular Atonement. But although - I could give no explanation of the consistency of the two, I would hold both upon God's authority.

[††††††††††††] Dr Payne tells us that the first spiritual perceptions of the truth are the result of Divine influence" p. 358; that “Divine revelation is never understood and received as the record of God without Divine influence,” p. 362; that “the mind in its natural state is morally incapable of taking just views of spiritual things,” p. 365. Dr Wardlaw holds that the work of the Spirit on the heart is as necessary to salvation as the work of Christ.

[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] Does Dr Payne understand this passage as including every family upon earth? If so, has every family received the blessing?

[§§§§§§§§§§§§] Does our author hold that all mankind died in Christ? This must inevitably follow if he died for all. Dr Payne admits that believers thus died, so that in fact he gives up his argument, for the wages of sin is death, and he that is dead is justified from sin, Rom. vi. 7.

[*************] Our author considers the bishop to be a faithful expositor of Pelagianism.

[†††††††††††††] Our author maintains that “There must be an immediate, however inexplicable, operation of the Spirit of God upon the mind, called in Scripture, opening the heart, &c. before there can be a spiritual discernment of the things of the Spirit of God,” 366.

[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] See this subject more fully illustrated in R. Haldane's Commentary on Romans. Vol. i., page 284, &c.

[§§§§§§§§§§§§§] The Gospel casts down our notions, or imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God.

[**************] Such is Dr Payne's definition of making satisfaction for sin. Now, without assuming the authority of a judge, while he abides by this definition, I shall continue to hold, that he does not admit that the death of Christ is a real Atonement. In this case, it was for the justification of God, and not for the justification of man. Its object was to maintain the semblance of justice,

[††††††††††††††] Hence Jesus speaks of his other sheep “not of this fold,” whom he “must also bring.” They had not yet heard him; but he says, “they shall hear my voice,” John x. 16.

[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] Thus also the Apostle speaks of himself as separated from his mother's womb, and called by his grace, Gal. i. 15; and Jeremiah was sanctified before he came forth out of the womb, and ordained to be a prophet to the nations. This implied his receiving in due time, all the qualifications required for the office.

[§§§§§§§§§§§§§§] Harmony of the Divine Attributes, p. 178; London, 1815, He describes justice as an “attribute as essential to the divine nature as mercy.” P. 57. He might have said more essential. God may be merciful, He must be just.

[***************] Here is the limitation of the Atonement, it is a propitiation for the true Israel, for all whom the Father hath given to Christ, from whom consequently they shall assuredly receive faith and repentance.

[†††††††††††††††] Why not also the same subjective motives?

Table of Contents

CHAPTER I.

CHAPTER II.

CHAPTER III.

CHAPTER IV.

CHAPTER V.

CHAPTER VI.

CHAPTER VII.

CHAPTER VIII.

CHAPTER IX.

CHAPTER X.

CHAPTER XI.

CHAPTER XII.

CHAPTER XIII.

CHAPTER XIV.

CHAPTER XV.

CHAPTER XVI.

CHAPTER XVII.

CHAPTER XVIII.

CHAPTER XIX.

CHAPTER XX.

CHAPTER XXI.

CHAPTER XXII.

CHAPTER XXIII.

CHAPTER XXIV.