eternally unholy and miserable. The eternal Son of the Father, therefore, seeing that no other sacrifice could suffice, said, "Lo, I come, to do thy will, O God," &c. (Heb. x. 4-10.) I do not say, that the Lord could not have devised some other way of redemption; but we can conceive no other, by which perfect justice and purity could harmonize with boundless mercy; and as Infinite Wisdom gave this the preference, we are sure that it was in itself most eligible. The dignity of the Divine Redeemer, as One with the Father in the unity of the Godhead; his eternal relation to the Father, as the adequate object of his infinite love; his appointment to, and voluntary susception of his office; his incarnation and consequent relation to us in the human nature; the perfect purity of his manhood; the complete obedience of his whole life, amidst all kinds of difficulties and temptations; the tortures and ignominy of his death; the entire resignation and meekness with which he suffered; the principle from which his obedience and submission sprang; and the end to which the whole was directed ; when they are duly considered and estimated, will combine to shew that he more honoured the law of God and its awful sanction by his righteousness and atonement, than if all men had either perfectly obeyed, or finally perished. When the Father was pleased thus to wound and bruise his well-beloved Son for the transgressions of his people, his judgment of the evil and desert of sin appeared most illustrious: when his love to sinners was shown to be inconceivably great, he would rather lay the load of their guilt and punishment on him in whom his soul delighted, than pardon them without testifying his abhorrence of their crimes. No encouragement could thus be given to others to venture on sin: no other sacrifice of this value and efficacy could be found all must see, that punishment was not the arbitrary act of an inexorable Judge, but the unavoidable result of perfect holiness and justice, even in a Being of infinite mercy. Thus every mouth will at length be stopped, or filled with adoration; every heart impressed with awe and astonishment; every hope taken away from the impenitent and presumptuous; and the glory of God more fully manifested in all his harmonious perfections, than by all his other works, judgments, and dispensations. The story of Zaleucus, prince of the Locrians, is well known: to show his abhorrence of adultery, and his determination to execute the law he had enacted, condemning the adulterer to the loss of both his eyes, and at the same time to evince his love to his Son, who had committed that crime; he willingly submitted to lose one of his own eyes, and ordered one of his son's to be put out also. Now what adulterer could hope to escape, when power was vested in a man, whom neither self-love, nor natural affection in its greatest force could induce to dispense with the law, or relax the rigour of its sentence? Thus the language both of the Father and of the Son in this way of saving sinners manifestly is, "Let the law be magnified and made honourable," in the sight of the whole universe.

I would not embarrass these brief Essays by any thing superfluous or dubious yet it seems to fall in with the design of them to observe, that the reward of righteousness is not annexed to a mere exemption from sin (for Adam on the day of his creation was free from sin); but to actual obedience during the appointed term of probation. So that the perfect righteousness of Christ was as necessary as the atonement of his death, to his mediatorial work on earth; not only as freedom from personal guilt was requisite in order to his bearing and expiating the sins of his people; but also as the meritorious purchase of their forfeited inheritance; that the second Adam's benefit might answer to the loss sustained through the first Adam. His was however a suffering obedience, and so expiatory; his death was the highest perfection of obedience, and so meritorious. We need not therefore very exactly distinguish between them; yet it is proper to maintain, that the believer is pardoned because his sin was imputed to Christ, and expiated by his sacrifice; and that he is justified and made an heir of heaven, because Christ" brought in an everlasting righteousness," "which is unto and upon

all them that believe, without any difference." Our Lord did not indeed bear all the misery to which the sinner is exposed: not being personally guilty, he could not endure the torments of an accusing conscience; knowing that he should triumph, and reign in glory, he could not feel the horrors of despair; and his infinite dignity rendering him able at once to make an all-sufficient atonement, it was not requisite that his sufferings should be eternal, as ours must otherwise have been. But he endured the scorn, rage, and cruelty of men, and all which they could inflict; the utmost malice of the powers of darkness; and the wrath and righteous vengeance of the Father; he bore shame, pain, and death in all its bitterness; and what he suffered in his soul during his agonies in the garden, and when he exclaimed on the cross, "My God! my God! why hast thou forsaken me?" we cannot conceive; only we know that "it pleased the Lord to bruise him ;"" the sword of vengeance awoke against him," and the "Father spared him not." We may therefore conclude, that he endured as much of that very misery which the wicked will endure from the wrath of God, and the malice of the infernal powers as could consist with perfect innocence, supreme love, and hope of speedy and final deliverance.

Many objection's have been made to this doctrine of a real atonement, and a vicarious sacrifice for sin, as if it were irrational or unjust, or gave an unamiable view of the Divine character; or as if it were unfavourable to the cause of morality and virtue: and great pains have been taken to explain away the language of holy Scripture on this subject, as if it implied not any of those things which the unlearned reader is apt to infer from it. It cannot be expected, that I should give a particular answer to each of these objections which result rather from the state of men's hearts, than from any solid grounds of reasoning; but it may suffice to observe in general, that "God hath made foolish things the wisdom of this world;" that "the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him ;" and especially, that "the preaching of the cross is foolishness," in the abstract, “to them that perish:" adverting to such testimonies of the Holy Spirit, we shall know what to think concerning those exclamations of irrational and absurd, which many of those who are wise in this world, and in their own eyes, employ in opposing the doctrine of the atonement. Nor can there be any injustice in this statement of it; for if one who was both able and willing to do it, was pleased to ransom his brethren from deserved eternal ruin, by enduring temporal sufferings and death as their Surety, what injustice could there be in accepting such a vicarious satisfaction for sin? And how can that doctrine give an unamiable view of the Deity, which shows him to be infinite in righteousness, holiness, love, mercy, faithfulness, and wisdom; and displays all these, and every other conceivable moral excellency, in full perfection and entire harmony? It can only appear so to sinners, because justice and holiness are not amiable in the eyes of the unjust and unholy. Or how can that doctrine be prejudicial to the cause of morality, which furnishes the most powerful motives and encouragements to holiness, and shows sin in all its horrid deformity, and with all its tremendous effects; and which has uniformly done more to "teach men to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world," than all other expedients besides have even appeared to do?

Let us then proceed to state a few select arguments, which demonstrate, that the doctrine, as it hath been explained and illustrated, is contained in the holy Scriptures.

the

I. The language used in them is decisive. It is not only said, that Jesus "redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us," (Gal. iii. 13); "that he suffered once for sins, the just for" (or instead of) unjust," (1 Pet. iii. 18); but that "he bare our sins, in his own body on the tree;" and " was made sin for us," (2 Cor. v. 20; 1 Pet. ii. 24). The prophet, speaking above seven hundred years before, "of the sufferings of

ATONEMENT OF CHRIST.

33

"was wounded for our Christ, and the glory that should follow," (Isaiah liii); having observed, that "he bore our griefs and carried our sorrows," transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities," shows the reason of this, by adding, that the Lord laid, or caused to meet, upon him the iniquity of us all:" so that "it was exacted and he became answerable," according to the genuine meaning of the next words, (ver. 7). Thus he would "justify many, for he would bear their iniquities," and not merely the punishment due to them. We may in many cases say, that the innocent suffers for the guilty, when one is exposed to loss or pain by means of another's fault, or for his benefit; but can it be said with propriety, that the Lord lays upon the innocent sufferer the iniquity of the offender, or that the latter bears the sins of the former, when no translation or imputation of guilt is intended, and no real atonement made? If so, what words can convey the idea of imWhat determinate meaning can there be in lanputation and atonement? guage? Or what doctrine can be deduced with certainty from the sacred oracles? The expressions ransom, redemption, purchased, bought with a price, propitiation, and several others, support this doctrine.

"Behold the Lamb of God which II. The testimony of John Baptist, taketh away the sin of the world,” (John i. 29), contains a very conclusive argument on this subject. Whatever other reasons may be thought of for a lamb being the selected emblem of the Lord Jesus, he could not as a lamb by the sacrifice of himself:" his teaching, rule, "take away sin," except " and example, have some effect, in different ways, in reforming mankind; and the influences of the Spirit sanctify the believer's heart: in these respects he may be said in some sense to take away sin; but as a lamb, he could only take away the guilt of it by giving himself to be slain, that he might "redeem us to God with his blood," being the antitype of the paschal lambs "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the and daily sacrifices, even world."

III. When the apostle argues (1 Cor. xv. 17), that "if Christ were not risen, the Corinthians were yet in their sins," what could he mean, but that, as nothing could prove the reality and efficacy of Christ's atonement, except his resurrection; so nothing could take away their guilt but that atonement? For their reformation and conversion to the worship and service of the true God was a fact which could not be denied, whatever men thought of the doctrines in question.

IV. The same apostle says, that "Christ will appear the second time without sin," &c. (Heb. ix. 28). "But did he not appear the first time without sin? What then is the meaning of this opposition, that at his first coming he bare our sins, but at his second he shall appear without sin? The words can have no other imaginable sense, but that at his first coming he sustained the person of a sinner, and suffered instead of us; but at his second coming he shall appear, not as a sacrifice, but as a Judge." (Tillotson).

V. The apostolical method of exhorting men to holiness evinces the same point. They uniformly draw their arguments, motives, and encouragements ye are bought from the cross of Christ; "His own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree; that we being dead to sin, might live unto God:" " with a price, therefore glorify God with your bodies and spirits, which are his," (see also 2 Cor. v. 14, 15; Eph. v. 1, 2, 25, 26; Tit. ii. 11-14; 1 Pet. i. 13-20). This is the distinguishing peculiarity of their exhortations, in which they differ from all others who have attempted to excite men to virtue or morality.

VI. The appointment of the Lord's Supper, in remembrance of the body of Christ broken, and his blood poured out, and as a representation of the manner in which we become interested in the blessings of his salvation, even by eating his flesh, and drinking his blood," (John vi. 48-58), is a conclusive argument on this subject; but it must be referred to a future Essay, when it will be fully discussed. At present I shall only call the reader's serious attention to the words of our Lord, when he instituted this ordinance :

"This is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many, for the remission of sins."

Lastly, The songs of the redeemed in heaven, even of those who had come out of great tribulation, and shed their blood for Christ's sake, may well close these few brief but unanswerable arguments of this doctrine. Without one discordant voice, they ascribe their salvation to "the Lamb that was slain, who hath redeemed them to God with his blood;" "who hath washed them from their sins in his own blood," &c. But in what sense could the Lamb that was slain wash them from sin with his blood, unless he were truly and literally an atoning sacrifice for them? And this shows us, of what vast importance this doctrine is in the system of Christianity; and that it is indeed essential to it: for he who denies or overlooks it, cannot have the same judgment of the Divine character and law, or of sin, that others have; he cannot approach God in the same way, or with the same plea; he cannot exercise a repentance or faith of the same kind; he cannot feel himself under the same obligations, act from the same motives, pray, thank, and bless God for the same things, or have the same reasons for meekness, patience, gratitude, humility, &c. &c.; and finally, he cannot be fit for the same heaven, but would dislike the company, dissent from the worship, and disrelish the pleasures and employments of those, who ascribe all their salvation to God, and to the Lamb that was slain. And is not this sufficient to prove, that he cannot possess the faith, hope, love, and joy, which are peculiar to the religion of the crucified Emmanuel?

But it is also to be feared, that numbers assent to this most important doctrine, who neither understand its nature and tendency, nor are suitably influenced by it. The cross of Christ, when contemplated by an enlightened mind, most emphatically teaches the perfect glory and beauty of the Divine character; the obligations, reasonableness, and excellency of the moral law; the value of immortal souls, the vanity of earthly distinctions, the misery of the most prosperous transgressors, the malignity of sin, the lost estate of mankind, the presumption of every self-righteous hope; the inestimable value of that foundation which God hath laid; the encouragements given to sinners to return to, and trust in him, and their obligations to serve and obey him, as their reconciled Father and Friend. He therefore who truly believes this doctrine, and who glories in the cross of Christ alone, will habitually give the concerns of eternity a decided preference to every worldly object; he will have an earnest desire to promote the salvation of souls, especially the souls of those who are most dear to him; he will be crucified to the world and the world to him; he will repent of, hate, and forsake all his sins, and seek the crucifixion of every sinful passion; he will admit of no other hope of salvation, than that which rests on the mercy of the Father, through the atonement of the Son; he will deem it his privilege, honour, and pleasure to live to him, who died for him and rose again: the example and love of Christ will reconcile him to reproach, self-denial, and suffering for righteousness' sake, and dispose him to forgiveness, love of enemies, patience, &c., and whatever can adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour.

Whilst we would therefore" contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints," we would also caution men not to "imprison the truth in unrighteousness." Not only are they enemies to the "cross of Christ," who vilify the doctrine of his atonement; but they also, who hold it in a carnal heart, and disgrace it by a worldly, sensual life, (Phil. iii. 18-21): and it is to be feared, that many who are zealous against the fatal Socinian heresy, are tainted with the abominable infection of Antinomianism; and that some others, who contend for the doctrine of the atonement, rest their hope upon their own works, and not on Christ. But as he that spared not his own Son, but delivered him " up for us all," will give the true believer all things with him; so he will not spare any of those who neglect, oppose, or abuse so great salvation.

ESSAY X.

On our Lord's Exaltation, and his Appearance "in the presence of God for us.”

WHEN our Saviour upon the cross was about to commend his spirit into the Father's hands, he said, "It is finished." Whatever the types had prefigured, or the prophets foretold, of his obedience, conflicts, and sufferings ; whatever the glory of God, the honour of his law, or the rights and satisfaction of his justice required; and whatever was necessary in order to his final victory, triumph, and exaltation at the right hand of the Father in our behalf, was then fully accomplished; that is, as far as it could be, previous to his death, which immediately followed. He then became conqueror over the world, sin, and Satan, (triumphing over them even on the cross): and having consecrated the grave by his burial, to be a sacred repository for the bodies of his disciples, he arose on the third day, a mighty victor over the king of terrors himself, and at that crisis commenced the glory which was to follow his sufferings.

The evidences of his resurrection have been already considered, (Essay I. p. 165-167); the ends which were answered by that great event, may here be briefly mentioned. He thus confirmed, beyond all reasonable doubt, every part of the doctrine he had taught; proving especially, that he was the Son of God in that peculiar and appropriate sense, in which he had claimed that high relation to the Father, and for which he had been condemned as a blasphemer; he fully evinced, that his atonement had been accepted, and had effectually answered those great and gracious purposes for which it had been made: he was thus capable of possessing in our nature the mediatorial throne, which had been covenanted to him as the reward of his obedience and sufferings; and to appear as our Advocate and Intercessor in the presence of the Father; being our Brother, and glorifying in that condescending relation to us; and, finally, he was the first fruits of the general resurrection, the earnest and pledge of that grand and interesting event.

We need not here enlarge on the circumstances of our Lord's resurrection, or enter further upon the instructions that may be deduced from it: but as his mediation is naturally divided into two distinct parts, it regularly falls within our plan o consider at present, that part which he now performs in his heavenly glory; as we before did that which he fulfilled during his humiliation on earth. From the depth of his voluntary abasement, "he ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things." He then "led captivity captive, and received gifts for men, yea, for the rebellious also; that the Lord God might dwell among them," (Psalm lxviii. 18; Eph. iv. 7-16.) "For the heavens must receive him, until the restitution of all things." "He is now gone to prepare a place for us; and he will come again, and receive us to himself, that where he is, there we," (who are his true disciples) "may be also," (John xiv. 2, 3; Acts iii. 21.) We will, therefore, in this Essay, point out the purposes for which Jesus, our forerunner," hath for us entered into heaven," and the means by which he prepares the way for our admission to the same place of holy felicity.

The royal prophet (Psalm cx. 4.) introduces Jehovah declaring with an irreversible oath, that the Messiah was constituted a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedec, (Gen. xiv. 18; Heb. vii ;) and the apostle thence argues, that the Aaronic priesthood was never intended to be perpetual. Now Melchizedec's priesthood especially differed from that of Aaron, in that it united the regal power with the sacerdotal office; which showed, that the Messiah was to "be a priest upon a throne," (Zech. vi. 9-15.) But before we enter more particularly on the discussion of this important subject, I would observe, that it affords us a most conclusive proof of our Lord's